Recent changes to feature-requests

#77 Eliminate line limit of 1000 lines

Mark Hessling — Thu, 17 Sep 2020 21:58:26 -0000

status: open --> closed
assigned_to: Mark Hessling

#77 Eliminate line limit of 1000 lines

Mark Hessling — Thu, 17 Sep 2020 21:56:39 -0000

Forgot to add that you can change the limit and where the output goes: SET REXXOUTPUT File|Display 9999

#77 Eliminate line limit of 1000 lines

Mark Hessling — Thu, 17 Sep 2020 21:47:20 -0000

The line limit applies to the number of lines of output from the Rexx macro as a result of SAY and TRACE output; not the size of the file. These lines are captured by THE to be displayed in a separate "file" in the ring.
THE macros in general shouldn't use SAY or TRACE output to interact with the user unless they are debugging the macro. And in the case of debugging, the line limit is to prevent THE from being stuck in an infinite loop as a result of an incorrect macro.

Eliminate line limit of 1000 lines

Rick Peaugh — Thu, 17 Sep 2020 20:43:32 -0000

When executing a macro on a large file (26,900 lines), the script stops with a "line limit (1000) exceeded". Why is such a limit imposed, never had this issue with large files in XEDIT on an IBM mainframe. I could change the script to start at a new location, but I would have to run it 20-25 times to complete the task, which is not acceptable to me. The script is simply joining lines until they are 132 characters each as they contain extraneous CRLF in them.

Eliminate line limit of 1000 lines

Rick Peaugh — Thu, 17 Sep 2020 20:43:32 -0000

Ticket 77 has been modified: Eliminate line limit of 1000 lines
Edited By: Mark Hessling (rexx)
Status updated: u'open' => u'closed'
Owner updated: None => u'rexx'

#76 Make handling of PENDING consistent with XEDIT

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz — Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:27:43 -0000

Attached are the original XEDIT macro and documentation of what it does.

Make handling of PENDING consistent with XEDIT

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz — Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:25:48 -0000

I have a package of prefix macros that I would like to port from XEDIT. They depend on the behavior of pending prefix macros in XEDIT. In particular,

The setup defines multiple synonyms to the script, and the processing differs depending on which
synonym the user typed into the sequence area.
The script relies on EXTRACT returning the synonym rather than the script name.
The script relies on XEDIT displaying the screen before processing the macros that it has set pending
in the prefix areas of inserted lines.

Support use of trace > within the macro

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz — Wed, 28 Aug 2019 17:10:13 -0000

I am trying to port a prefix macro originally written for XEDIT. My main debugging tool for Rexx is the trace instruction. In every other environment I've used, I can respond to the output fome trace ?i, but under the it appears as though stdin is some file other than the keyboard. I would like a mechanism that support the use of trace ? in the macros and the prefix macros.

Provide equivalent to GLOBALV

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz — Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:14:52 -0000

CMS has a command called GLOBALV that allows passing variables between REXX scripts, even across logons. It uses the files

    SESSION GLOBALV (for values required throughout the session)
    LASTING GLOBALV (for values that are to last permanently).
    (INITIAL GLOBALV) (for default values)

I'm only concerned with two of the GLOBALV functions, e.g.,

            GLOBALV SELECT PFXHLASM SETP INDENT_DO 3
           GLOBALV SELECT PFXHLASM GET  INDENT_DO INDENT_IF

but if it's easy to impliment more I believe that people would exploit that.

Provide THE equivalent for push

Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz — Mon, 26 Aug 2019 18:06:08 -0000

It is common for REXX script on CMS and TSO to use push to cause a command to be executed after the script completes. *BSD, DOS,, Linux, OS/2 and windows have no facility for maintaining a command stack, and the stack in Rexx is strictly a Rexx construct. This causes problems when porting Rexx code from the mainframe, including XEDIT macros. It would be helpful if THE had a mechanism for a macro to pass back commands, or at least a single command, to be executed after the macro terminates.