That's Seymour. I don't know what you consider to be the "current" definition, but the first hit that I got ha nothing to do with copy books., nor do macros in C.
Google for, e.g., #def, #if. The definition of macro has never been the same as copy. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 ________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of Jon Perryman <jperr...@pacbell.net> Sent: Thursday, September 26, 2019 2:36 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Who writes these things? On Wednesday, September 25, 2019, 07:05:47 PM PDT, Clark Morris wrote: >> Copy books cam in with Jovial, well before 1970. >> Assemblers had COPY instructions in the 1960s. >> PL/I had the %INCLUDE statement in the 1960s. By 1970 it was old hat. > COBOL D on DOS/360 had copybooks in 1966 or earlier. Sorry for the confusion. I was referring to the current internet definition of "macro" which Seymore said existed since 1950. C macro's (1970) are similar functionality to copy books. Was the definition of "macro" always the same as "copy"? Jon. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
