On Sat, Oct 29, 2011 at 3:46 PM, Chip Davis <c...@aviatrexx.com> wrote:
> I don't understand this. Has the submitter misunderstood that the > search order for subroutines/functions is not necessarily the same as > that for commands? > > The former is documented in Sect.7.2.1.1 and seems to be nearly > identical to the way it's described in my OS/2 REXX Reference (with > the substitution of "directory of invoking program" for "function > package". > > The latter has always been under control of the addressed environment. > There's never been any way that the Rexx processor could (or should, > imo) control that. > > What I don't understand (partially because I can't see his test code) > is how he got different results "prior to 4.1.0". > > What am I missing? > Hi Chip, I don't know what you are missing either. This is one of those things that gives me a headache just trying to understand what the submitter is saying. <grin> So, being busy today, I just brushed past it. It's doubtful to me that the behavior changed between 4.0.1 and 4.1.0. But, he did attach a test program, so I'll give it a try. You should be able to download his test file by going to the tracker item in SourceForge and downloading the attachment. -- Mark Miesfeld
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get your Android app more play: Bring it to the BlackBerry PlayBook in minutes. BlackBerry App World™ now supports Android™ Apps for the BlackBerry® PlayBook™. Discover just how easy and simple it is! http://p.sf.net/sfu/android-dev2dev
_______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
