Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!cbmvax!darren
From: darren@cbmvax.commodore.com (Darren Greenwald)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Subject: Re: REXX command standards
Message-ID: <15874@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 14 Nov 90 23:46:20 GMT
References: <1990Nov12.224249.18759@sisd.kodak.com> <533@epicb.com>
Reply-To: darren@cbmvax.commodore.com (Darren Greenwald)
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 31

In article <533@epicb.com> jerry@truevision.com (Jerry Thompson) writes:
>Does anyone in the Amiga Developers Association know if there is anything
>being done to standardized AREXX commands?
>-- 
>Jerry Thompson                 |     // checks  ___________   | "I'm into S&M,

This is a good idea, and a number of us have thought the same at
one time or another.  Couple of things to keep in mind:

	1.) Those that have supported ARexx would need to update
	    their software, supplied scripts, and user created
	    scripts to come up to spec.  Kind of tough on those
	    who supported ARexx, and its going to be hard to
	    come up with much in the way of agreements (I suspect).

	2.) When defining standards for commands, you also want
	    to (or may want to) define how the command parser
	    should behave (e.g., case vs non-case sensitivity,
	    whole word vs partial word recognition, abbreviations,
	    ARGUMENT types for standard commands, ARGUMENT types
	    in general, etc.)

Not to say this shouldn't be done - just some things to keep in mind.


--------------------------------------------------------------
Darren M. Greenwald | Commodore-Amiga Software Engineering   
                    | USENET: uunet!cbmvax!darren                       
--------------------------------------------------------------
Quote: "It would be impossible to discuss the subject without
        a common frame of reference." - Spock