Re: qsh from cl

Fans of rolling their own CL-pretty won't like it much, but I use the RDi
formatter a lot - and I choose to put each parameter on its own line - at
least to start on its own line.

Indentation is also available in CL in EDi - it indents decision blocks
where is a DO, basically. Now other kinds of indentation, well, again, if
you do your own, you can turn formatting off in RDi.

Evan, you mention "...gets moved around..." - in fact, the pipe characters
are NOT invariant in the various EBCDIC CCSIDs - the asterisk and the
letters are in the same place in all of them, so they are safer when
working in various national languages.

Besides, I never remember which direction which arrow really controls -
it's almost as bad as the buttons on an elevator for opening and closing
the doors - I never get them right!!

Cheers
Vern


On 3/6/2018 2:44 PM, Evan Harris wrote:

Personally I think the idea of a whole pile of parameters with no keywords
would be even uglier than the verbose string the CL prompter produces.
Despite the perceived ugliness including the keywords removes pretty much
all the possible ambiguity.

If I was that horrified I think I would write a CL "prettifier" in Python,
but I've been looking at CL so long I find the prompts comforting.

One argument for *BCAT and *TCAT vs pipes etc is that there is no
possibility of a character translation error if the source gets moved
around.