Date: Mon, 17 Nov 1997 14:51:24 -0800
Reply-To: REXX Programming discussion list <REXXLIST@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
Sender: REXX Programming discussion list <REXXLIST@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
From: "Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz" <nospam@GSG.EDS.COM>
Organization: EDS MS
Subject: Re: Why REXX is not my favorite scripting language (was Re:
regular expression matching)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Doug Quale wrote:
> Unfortunately this isn't standard REXX. If it ain't in
> _The_REXX_Language_ by M. F. Cowlishaw, 2nd edition, it doesn't help me.
The reference that you gave isn't standard REXX. It isn't even SAA REXX,
which comes closer. There is an ANSI standard for REXX, and it *does*
> Apparently it is common to confuse a particular implementation with the
> programming language itself.
Damn near universal.
> Even a single vendor (IBM) has incompatible
> implementations on its own operating systems.
Why not? The C community has had to struggle with incompatible compilers
not only on operating systems from the same vendor but on the *same*
operating system. Likewise the Pascal community before Borland cornered
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
Senior Software SE
Practice Safe REXX
The values in from and reply-to are for the benefit of spammers:
reply to domain eds.com, user msustys1.smetz or to domain gsg.eds.com,
user smetz. Do not reply to email@example.com