David Spiegel wrote, in part: >You said: "...&HLQ. as literal is never valid in those places, ..." >You've made an incorrect assumption.
No, we've made an incorrect observation, or one that is no longer correct.thanks! You and Gil (and others) have pointed me in a new direction, which I will explore. This has been an irritation. FWIW, no customer has said "Why aren't you doing.", so I suspect this is not well-understood usage in general. Either that or they're just laughing quietly at us :) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
