Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!utgpu!watserv1!watdragon!dahlia!rsingh1
From: rsingh1@dahlia.waterloo.edu
Newsgroups: comp.lang.rexx
Subject: Re: AREXX
Message-ID: <19386@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Date: 18 Dec 89 20:25:35 GMT
References: <89349.005246ARTABAR@MTUS5.BITNET> <25110@cup.portal.com> <5915@alvin.mcnc.org>
Sender: daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu
Reply-To: rsingh1@dahlia.waterloo.edu ()
Organization: U. of Waterloo, Ontario
Lines: 33

In article <5915@alvin.mcnc.org> brooking@mcnc.org (Jim Brooking) writes:

"I mildly disagree; if there are different REXX newsgroups
"corresponding to different dialects of REXX, we a) encourage
"different implementations of REXX to offer different language
"constructs, etc., instead of encouraging all implementations
"to stay in synch. We should avoid balkanizing REXX. Further,
"we b) miss interesting and/or useful ideas that AREXX folks,
"CMS folks, and unix folks (eventually) will have. Not so that
"noone on CMS uses USENET. I had a conversation last evening
"with a CMS person who learned of me thru USENET.
 
"						Jim Brooking

I pretty much aggree, but I think that the threat of different dialects
of Rexx isn't really there.  The 'dialect' stems from the same roots (early
rexx things running on VMS (I guess... not sure)).  The dynamics of the
language are the same.
 
If someone was actualy proposing a new construct to rexx, the person would
probably 'cross post' to all the rexx newsgroups. (not all that many really)

Also, the different implementations of rexx are already pretty much
incompatble.  Take Arexx for example.  Plenty of machine specifics
to get in the way of porting something over to another system.
 
Later


               /Paul Anton Sop (Esquire?).  rsingh1@dahila.waterloo.edu/
              /Graphic Designer 4 Spaghetti Western Words and Images  /
             /100 Kinzie Ave, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada, N2A 2J5    /
            /(519) 578-8525/742-0372 (if seriously really desparate)/