"TSO/E Version 2 Procedures Language MVS/REXX, SC28-1883-1" "Stop disingenuously picking on him." Is that so? The "SYSCALL" in REXX is an ADDRESS SYSCALL under the covers - similar to ADDRESS IPCS/MVS/TSO/ISREDIT or whatever other else. It is the "ADDRESS" that belongs in REXX. "SYSCALL" is a CLIST instruction/directive/function/command/call/enhancement/enterprise/whatever-else, as per the example I gave of using it. What matters is what SYSCALL does and how it does it - not what it is called (instruction/directive/function/command/call/enhancement/enterprise or whatever-else waffle.) Pardon me, but I am merely a retired systems programming consultant who did not graduate to hifalutin systems poetry. BTW The spelling "Rexx" applies to non-IBM versions (including Mike Cowlishaw's.) In IBM's spelling, it is "REXX" (from "Restructed EXtended eXecutor.") HTH
On 08/07/2022 03:12, Paul Gilmartin wrote: > On Fri, 8 Jul 2022 02:38:38 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote: > >> Without meaning to bump into what might be off topic, SYSCALL is >> actually a CLIST instruction - not a REXX one (unless it's a case of >> "nous avons changé tout ça") >> > When Charles started this thread on June 28, he made it clear that he > was discussing Rexx, despite a couple naive errors. Stop disingenuously > picking on him. > > SYSCALL belongs in Rexx, where it is not an instruction but a > command environment. > GIYF: > <https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=processing-syscall-environment>. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
