Re: Some REXX help
On Tue, 21 Oct 2008 11:00:19 -0500, RPN01 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >To me, \= is not "not equal" at all; This conversation was the first t ime >I'd ever seen that notation. The not sign is specific, but doesn't exist on >some character sets. The only consistent one would be <>, at least in my >experience. >-- >Bob Nix The problem is that NOT is also used by itself, in additon to in ^=. <> does not help you there. I suppose you could create a "not" subroutine. and code not(new) instead of ^new. not: procedure return \arg(1) The recommendation to use \ comes from a recent book on REXX which covers multiple different implementations of REXX. Actually, I do use <>, since I learned it while coding SAS. CMS Pipelines PICK stage uses ^= or ^==, but also accepts /=, \= . /==, \==. P.S. I am typing caret ^ (above the 6) on my keyboard here, and that is also what I see on my terminal emulator. I don't know what your are going to see. Alan Ackerman Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com
Re: Some REXX help
Close. For EXEC, you could use:
Symbol Operation
= or EQequals
¬= or NEnot equal
< or LTless than
<= or LEless than or equal to (not greater than)
> or GTgreater than
>= or GEgreater than or equal to (not less than)
For EXEC2, you could use:
-.-=--.-
|-EQ-|
|-¬=-|
|-NE-|
|-<--|
|-LT-|
|-<=-|
|-¬>-|
|-LE-|
|-NG-|
|->--|
|-GT-|
|->=-|
|-¬<-|
|-GE-|
'-NL-'
These can be found by doing HELP EXEC MENU and HELP EXEC2 MENU and then
looking under &IF.
Doug Breneman z/VM Development IBM Endicott, NY
From: "Huegel, Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Date: 10/21/2008 01:41 PM
Subject:Re: Some REXX help
Trying to think back, but didn't EXEC or EXEC(2) take the english word i.e.
&IF &A EQUAL &B
or am I getting old and confusing it with COBOL?
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [?mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Schuh, Richard
Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 11:58 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Some REXX help
Since Rexx accepts either the not sign or \ as an alternate not sign,
and since the \ was foisted off on us a long time ago because of errors
in sending files with the "real" not sign, I have become accustomed to
seeing "\" and thinking "not". It is no different than accepting "^" as
a not sign, and similar to accepting "don't" or "dont" as meaning "do
not". I am surprised you haven't seen the conversation before.
I am not trying to force other people to conform to what seems natural
to me. I merely pointed out that each has his/her own idea of what is
natural. What seems natural to you may not seem so to others. I had been
programming 22 years before I ran across "\" as an alternate not sign
and did not see the "<>" notation for several years after that. Is it
any wonder that I do not see that "ugly" expression as natural? :-)
Regards,
Richard Schuh
> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
> [?mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01
> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 9:00 AM
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: Re: Some REXX help
>
> To me, \= is not "not equal" at all; This conversation was
> the first time I'd ever seen that notation. The not sign is
> specific, but doesn't exist on some character sets. The only
> consistent one would be <>, at least in my experience.
> --
> Bob Nix
>
>
> On 10/21/08 10:56 AM, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Maybe more readable to some but not to others. If you take
> the symbols
> > at face value, \=, not equal to, is more readable than <>,
> is less than
> > or greater than. I guess it depends on whether you first
> encountered the
> > notion in mathematics or programming. To me, the not equal
> too is more
> > natural.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Richard Schuh
> >
> >
> >
> >> -Original Message-
> >> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
> >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01
> >> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 6:48 AM
> >> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> >> Subject: Re: Some REXX help
> >>
> >> You can also make it a bit more readable, and less character
> >> set dependent, by replacing the \= with <>.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation.~.
> >> RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW/V\
> >> 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\
> >> -^^-^^
> >> "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in
> >> practice, theory and practice are different."
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 10/20/08 11:11 PM, "Alan Ackerman"
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard
> >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >>> wrot
> >>> e:
> >>>
> >>>> Ah, but the semicolon make
Re: Some REXX help
Trying to think back, but didn't EXEC or EXEC(2) take the english word i.e. &IF &A EQUAL &B or am I getting old and confusing it with COBOL? -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Schuh, Richard Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 11:58 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Some REXX help Since Rexx accepts either the not sign or \ as an alternate not sign, and since the \ was foisted off on us a long time ago because of errors in sending files with the "real" not sign, I have become accustomed to seeing "\" and thinking "not". It is no different than accepting "^" as a not sign, and similar to accepting "don't" or "dont" as meaning "do not". I am surprised you haven't seen the conversation before. I am not trying to force other people to conform to what seems natural to me. I merely pointed out that each has his/her own idea of what is natural. What seems natural to you may not seem so to others. I had been programming 22 years before I ran across "\" as an alternate not sign and did not see the "<>" notation for several years after that. Is it any wonder that I do not see that "ugly" expression as natural? :-) Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 9:00 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: Some REXX help > > To me, \= is not "not equal" at all; This conversation was > the first time I'd ever seen that notation. The not sign is > specific, but doesn't exist on some character sets. The only > consistent one would be <>, at least in my experience. > -- > Bob Nix > > > On 10/21/08 10:56 AM, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Maybe more readable to some but not to others. If you take > the symbols > > at face value, \=, not equal to, is more readable than <>, > is less than > > or greater than. I guess it depends on whether you first > encountered the > > notion in mathematics or programming. To me, the not equal > too is more > > natural. > > > > Regards, > > Richard Schuh > > > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 > >> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 6:48 AM > >> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > >> Subject: Re: Some REXX help > >> > >> You can also make it a bit more readable, and less character > >> set dependent, by replacing the \= with <>. > >> > >> -- > >> Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation.~. > >> RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW/V\ > >> 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\ > >> -^^-^^ > >> "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in > >> practice, theory and practice are different." > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 10/20/08 11:11 PM, "Alan Ackerman" > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> wrot > >>> e: > >>> > >>>> Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as > >>>> > >>>> If rest¬sym; > >>>> ='' then call ... > >>>> > >>>> Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Richard Schuh > >>> > >>> Standard HTML entities like > and < start with an & (am > >>> persand) and end with a ; (semicolon). > >>> The whole string ¬sym; was supposed to be a NOT SIGN. > >> True, if you > >>> typed that into REXX, it would think the ; was a statement > >> separator. > >>> But you don't want to remove the semicolon, you want to > >> map ¬sym; > >>> to / (slash) or \ (backslash) or not-sign. REXX does not require a > >>> not-sign > >>> -- I recommend using backslash. > >>> > >>> Alan Ackerman > >>> Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com > >> >
Re: Some REXX help
Since Rexx accepts either the not sign or \ as an alternate not sign, and since the \ was foisted off on us a long time ago because of errors in sending files with the "real" not sign, I have become accustomed to seeing "\" and thinking "not". It is no different than accepting "^" as a not sign, and similar to accepting "don't" or "dont" as meaning "do not". I am surprised you haven't seen the conversation before. I am not trying to force other people to conform to what seems natural to me. I merely pointed out that each has his/her own idea of what is natural. What seems natural to you may not seem so to others. I had been programming 22 years before I ran across "\" as an alternate not sign and did not see the "<>" notation for several years after that. Is it any wonder that I do not see that "ugly" expression as natural? :-) Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 9:00 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: Some REXX help > > To me, \= is not "not equal" at all; This conversation was > the first time I'd ever seen that notation. The not sign is > specific, but doesn't exist on some character sets. The only > consistent one would be <>, at least in my experience. > -- > Bob Nix > > > On 10/21/08 10:56 AM, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Maybe more readable to some but not to others. If you take > the symbols > > at face value, \=, not equal to, is more readable than <>, > is less than > > or greater than. I guess it depends on whether you first > encountered the > > notion in mathematics or programming. To me, the not equal > too is more > > natural. > > > > Regards, > > Richard Schuh > > > > > > > >> -Original Message- > >> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 > >> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 6:48 AM > >> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > >> Subject: Re: Some REXX help > >> > >> You can also make it a bit more readable, and less character > >> set dependent, by replacing the \= with <>. > >> > >> -- > >> Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation.~. > >> RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW/V\ > >> 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\ > >> -^^-^^ > >> "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in > >> practice, theory and practice are different." > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> On 10/20/08 11:11 PM, "Alan Ackerman" > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> wrot > >>> e: > >>> > >>>> Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as > >>>> > >>>> If rest¬sym; > >>>> ='' then call ... > >>>> > >>>> Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; > >>>> > >>>> Regards, > >>>> Richard Schuh > >>> > >>> Standard HTML entities like > and < start with an & (am > >>> persand) and end with a ; (semicolon). > >>> The whole string ¬sym; was supposed to be a NOT SIGN. > >> True, if you > >>> typed that into REXX, it would think the ; was a statement > >> separator. > >>> But you don't want to remove the semicolon, you want to > >> map ¬sym; > >>> to / (slash) or \ (backslash) or not-sign. REXX does not require a > >>> not-sign > >>> -- I recommend using backslash. > >>> > >>> Alan Ackerman > >>> Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com > >> >
Re: Some REXX help
Bob, what I have noticed in some postings to this list over the years is that the not sign (bent bar, whatever) doesn't always translate to the correct character. I've noticed that usually the back slash "\" gets substituted in its place. Regards, Steve - may your bit bucket never overflow - may your disk space be endless - may you always run full duplex a sysprog's blessing. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 12:00 PM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Some REXX help To me, \= is not "not equal" at all; This conversation was the first time I'd ever seen that notation. The not sign is specific, but doesn't exist on some character sets. The only consistent one would be <>, at least in my experience. -- Bob Nix On 10/21/08 10:56 AM, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe more readable to some but not to others. If you take the symbols > at face value, \=, not equal to, is more readable than <>, is less than > or greater than. I guess it depends on whether you first encountered the > notion in mathematics or programming. To me, the not equal too is more > natural. > > Regards, > Richard Schuh > > > >> -Original Message- >> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 >> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 6:48 AM >> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU >> Subject: Re: Some REXX help >> >> You can also make it a bit more readable, and less character >> set dependent, by replacing the \= with <>. >> >> -- >> Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation.~. >> RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW/V\ >> 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\ >> -^^-^^ >> "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in >> practice, theory and practice are different." >> >> >> >> >> On 10/20/08 11:11 PM, "Alan Ackerman" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrot >>> e: >>> >>>> Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as >>>> >>>> If rest¬sym; >>>> ='' then call ... >>>> >>>> Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Richard Schuh >>> >>> Standard HTML entities like > and < start with an & (am >>> persand) and end with a ; (semicolon). >>> The whole string ¬sym; was supposed to be a NOT SIGN. >> True, if you >>> typed that into REXX, it would think the ; was a statement >> separator. >>> But you don't want to remove the semicolon, you want to >> map ¬sym; >>> to / (slash) or \ (backslash) or not-sign. REXX does not require a >>> not-sign >>> -- I recommend using backslash. >>> >>> Alan Ackerman >>> Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com >>
Re: Some REXX help
To me, \= is not "not equal" at all; This conversation was the first time I'd ever seen that notation. The not sign is specific, but doesn't exist on some character sets. The only consistent one would be <>, at least in my experience. -- Bob Nix On 10/21/08 10:56 AM, "Schuh, Richard" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Maybe more readable to some but not to others. If you take the symbols > at face value, \=, not equal to, is more readable than <>, is less than > or greater than. I guess it depends on whether you first encountered the > notion in mathematics or programming. To me, the not equal too is more > natural. > > Regards, > Richard Schuh > > > >> -Original Message- >> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System >> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 >> Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 6:48 AM >> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU >> Subject: Re: Some REXX help >> >> You can also make it a bit more readable, and less character >> set dependent, by replacing the \= with <>. >> >> -- >> Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation.~. >> RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW/V\ >> 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\ >> -^^-^^ >> "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in >> practice, theory and practice are different." >> >> >> >> >> On 10/20/08 11:11 PM, "Alan Ackerman" >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>> wrot >>> e: >>> >>>> Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as >>>> >>>> If rest¬sym; >>>> ='' then call ... >>>> >>>> Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> Richard Schuh >>> >>> Standard HTML entities like > and < start with an & (am >>> persand) and end with a ; (semicolon). >>> The whole string ¬sym; was supposed to be a NOT SIGN. >> True, if you >>> typed that into REXX, it would think the ; was a statement >> separator. >>> But you don't want to remove the semicolon, you want to >> map ¬sym; >>> to / (slash) or \ (backslash) or not-sign. REXX does not require a >>> not-sign >>> -- I recommend using backslash. >>> >>> Alan Ackerman >>> Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com >>
Re: Some REXX help
Maybe more readable to some but not to others. If you take the symbols at face value, \=, not equal to, is more readable than <>, is less than or greater than. I guess it depends on whether you first encountered the notion in mathematics or programming. To me, the not equal too is more natural. Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of RPN01 > Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 6:48 AM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: Some REXX help > > You can also make it a bit more readable, and less character > set dependent, by replacing the \= with <>. > > -- > Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation.~. > RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW/V\ > 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\ > -^^-^^ > "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in > practice, theory and practice are different." > > > > > On 10/20/08 11:11 PM, "Alan Ackerman" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > wrot > > e: > > > >> Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as > >> > >> If rest¬sym; > >> ='' then call ... > >> > >> Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; > >> > >> Regards, > >> Richard Schuh > > > > Standard HTML entities like > and < start with an & (am > > persand) and end with a ; (semicolon). > > The whole string ¬sym; was supposed to be a NOT SIGN. > True, if you > > typed that into REXX, it would think the ; was a statement > separator. > > But you don't want to remove the semicolon, you want to > map ¬sym; > > to / (slash) or \ (backslash) or not-sign. REXX does not require a > > not-sign > > -- I recommend using backslash. > > > > Alan Ackerman > > Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com >
Re: Some REXX help
Thanks everyone. I suppose I should been able to figure that one out, but my mindset was that it was just a coding technique that I am not familiar with... I should read it as English... Live and learn. -Original Message- From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of RPN01 Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2008 8:48 AM To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Subject: Re: Some REXX help You can also make it a bit more readable, and less character set dependent, by replacing the \= with <>. -- Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation.~. RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW/V\ 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\ -^^-^^ "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different." On 10/20/08 11:11 PM, "Alan Ackerman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot > e: > >> Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as >> >> If rest¬sym; >> ='' then call ... >> >> Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; >> >> Regards, >> Richard Schuh > > Standard HTML entities like > and < start with an & (am > persand) and end with a ; (semicolon). > The whole string ¬sym; was supposed to be a NOT SIGN. True, if you > typed that into REXX, it > would think the ; was a statement separator. But you don't want to remove > the semicolon, you > want to map ¬sym; to / (slash) or \ (backslash) or not-sign. REXX > does not require a not-sign > -- I recommend using backslash. > > Alan Ackerman > Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com
Re: Some REXX help
You can also make it a bit more readable, and less character set dependent, by replacing the \= with <>. -- Robert P. Nix Mayo Foundation.~. RO-OE-5-55 200 First Street SW/V\ 507-284-0844 Rochester, MN 55905 /( )\ -^^-^^ "In theory, theory and practice are the same, but in practice, theory and practice are different." On 10/20/08 11:11 PM, "Alan Ackerman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot > e: > >> Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as >> >> If rest¬sym; >> ='' then call ... >> >> Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; >> >> Regards, >> Richard Schuh > > Standard HTML entities like > and < start with an & (am > persand) and end with a ; (semicolon). > The whole string ¬sym; was supposed to be a NOT SIGN. True, if you > typed that into REXX, it > would think the ; was a statement separator. But you don't want to remove > the semicolon, you > want to map ¬sym; to / (slash) or \ (backslash) or not-sign. REXX > does not require a not-sign > -- I recommend using backslash. > > Alan Ackerman > Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com
Re: Some REXX help
On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 16:06:48 -0700, Schuh, Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrot e: >Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as > >If rest¬sym; >='' then call ... > >Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; > >Regards, >Richard Schuh Standard HTML entities like > and < start with an & (am persand) and end with a ; (semicolon). The whole string ¬sym; was supposed to be a NOT SIGN. True, if you typed that into REXX, it would think the ; was a statement separator. But you don't want to remove the semicolon, you want to map ¬sym; to / (slash) or \ (backslash) or not-sign. REXX does not require a not-sign -- I recommend using backslash. Alan Ackerman Alan (dot) Ackerman (at) Bank of America (dot) com
Re: Some REXX help
Ah, but the semicolon makes it two Rexx statements. The same as If rest¬sym; ='' then call ... Your syntax will be better if you remove the ; Regards, Richard Schuh > -Original Message- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Rob van der Heij > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2008 3:55 PM > To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU > Subject: Re: Some REXX help > > On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:43 AM, Huegel, Thomas > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > if rest¬sym;='' then call error 'E', 24, 'Invalid > parameters specified' > > > > Its the rest¬sym;=''that I don't understand. > > \= or /= Someone expected that to be substituted by the "not sign" > > Rob >
Re: Some REXX help
The ¬sym; is supposed be a "not" symbol when it gets printed in the book. This means that this line is supposed to be If rest is not equal to null then call error... On my keyboard, this is If rest ^= '' then call error... You can also use <> for not equal. I will contact the z/VM Information developers and have this corrected. Thank you. Doug Breneman z/VM Development Endicott, NY From: "Huegel, Thomas" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU Date: 10/20/2008 06:43 PM Subject:Some REXX help I copied this line from the REXX VM/REFERENCE It is from a sample SOCKETS SERVER exec (page 16.2). When I try to execute it I get errors. I have not seen code like this before, I wonder if anyone can explain the technique to me? if rest¬sym;='' then call error 'E', 24, 'Invalid parameters specified' Its the rest¬sym;=''that I don't understand. Thanks
Re: Some REXX help
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 12:43 AM, Huegel, Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > if rest¬sym;='' then call error 'E', 24, 'Invalid parameters specified' > > Its the rest¬sym;=''that I don't understand. \= or /= Someone expected that to be substituted by the "not sign" Rob
Some REXX help
I copied this line from the REXX VM/REFERENCE It is from a sample SOCKETS SERVER exec (page 16.2). When I try to execute it I get errors. I have not seen code like this before, I wonder if anyone can explain the technique to me? if rest¬sym;='' then call error 'E', 24, 'Invalid parameters specified' Its the rest¬sym;=''that I don't understand. Thanks
