Talk:Josephus problem: Difference between revisions
ooRexx is, to 99.9 percent, a classic Rexx Interpreter! Why deny this and "fight" forever?
Walterpachl (talk | contribs) (ooRexx is, to 99.9 percent, a classic Rexx Interpreter! Why deny this and "fight" forever?) |
|||
Line 9:
:For some reason category oorexx diverts to category REXX as if someone else has taken the decision to treat them alike. One moment... ...this was done [http://rosettacode.org/mw/index.php?title=Oorexx&action=history here]. Maybe you could leave a note for a chat with ShinTakezou? --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] ([[User talk:Paddy3118|talk]]) 06:06, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
::To me and many others ooRexx *IS* not only a Rexx++ as you may call it but also a valid (classic) Rexx interpreter. Minor syntactic "glitches" as I would call them have been removed from the language definition by the ANSII REXX Committee. I tried to document all the little differences somewhere.
I shall remove the "criticism right now. My words were meant to help other users.
Yet I DO insist that Rexx programs that don't use the ++, i.e. the oo features, do have their proper place in the REXX category and only zjose that do (use them) should and do appear under ooRexx.
--[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 07:42, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
| |||