Re: qsh from cl

Love the indenting for CL in RDi. Especially now that they've fixed the comment indent honoring. Not as much love for the auto-formatting as line breaks are not clean.

Have tried one parm per line and I *sort of* like it. Very easy to read but uses a lot of real estate. Of course, with my 22" monitor turned vertical, I get 128 lines per screen!

Guess I need to do my RFE for CL editing to NOT auto-format select blocks. Like a <pre> </pre> HTML block. Doubtful it's worth IBM's effort but I'd really like it for concatenation and for embedded SQL in CL.

Roger Harman
COMMON Certified Application Developer - ILE RPG on IBM i on Power

 
 




From: MIDRANGE-L <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx> on behalf of Vernon Hamberg <vhamberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, March 6, 2018 1:10 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: 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.


On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:32 AM, John Yeung <gallium.arsenide@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Musselman, Paul
<pmusselman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I've heard [letting the prompter format CL code] is good practice, just

in case IBM re-arranges a parameter on you.

Yes, this is the standard advice. It is, without a doubt, safer to do
this. But it is just so fugly that I have difficulty doing it.

Besides being ridiculously verbose, using the prompter also destroys
indentation. I mean, it's really just painful to read.

John Y.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l

MIDRANGE-L Info Page
lists.midrange.com
To unsubscribe from MIDRANGE-L, get a password reminder, or change your subscription options enter your subscription email address:

or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate
link: http://amzn.to/2dEadiD