Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Dialects: Difference between revisions
how to proceed
m (added REXX and o-o REXXes section. -- ~~~~) |
Walterpachl (talk | contribs) (how to proceed) |
||
Line 106:
Since the above mentioned ''cross-entering'' has now occurred (with no apparent corrective possibility) and that this is continuing to happen, I would hope there would be a consensus before the pollution gets to far to be corrected easily. As an aside, I have no desire to change program syntax or variables for portability to a language that is of no interest to me, I'm trying to write the classic REXX code to ensure that it works for all classic REXX interpreters (that I can test) and I'm not interested in object-oriented languages. For classic REXX programs, it's like using a hammer to kill a fly. That is why there exists two other o-o REXX language sections (NetRexx and ooRexx). I haven't seen any effort in making ooRexx compatible to class REXX (and there shouldn't be, of course; that portability wouldn't be useful, I should think). -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] 21:01, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
My suggestion was to have Classic, or let's say plain Rexx programs under Rexx
Object oriented Rexx programs under ooRexx (I hav eno idea how Roo fits with tah
and NetRexx, to me is an entirely different story.
I remeber having seen entries in ooRexx that said something like: the Rexx program works also under ooRexx
Would you want to have either that entence for all Rexx programs that work unchanged and
the changed version (changing $# and a= as necessary) in ooRexx?
I shall proceed in that direction.
--[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] 21:13, 8 July 2012 (UTC)
| |||