×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
IBM implemented a true REXX compiler on the mainframe ... so why couldn't they do the same on the IBM i?
On Tuesday, August 20, 2019, 2:55:48 PM EDT, dlclark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <dlclark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"MIDRANGE-L" <midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote on 08/20/2019
02:45:31 PM:
Rexx is an objectively *bad* language to use when you want to
implement a procedure which will be used as a function in RPG. I think
we agree on that.
As things currently exist -- that is true. But it doesn't *have*
to be and that is *not* a mind-set issue (except in IBM's mind). I think
there are things that REXX does better than either RPG or CL. So, why
can't we use a REXX procedure as a procedure call from RPG? If the REXX
RETURN instructions was supported for invocations from either CL/ILE or
RPG/ILE then REXX would be a much more viable language for
interoperability on the IBM i.
Sincerely,
Dave Clark
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact
[javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
