REXX (open Object Rexx) Plugin for JEdit.

[Thomas.Schneider.Wien]

Hello David Ashley, Rick,

   I do know that Jedit (www.Jedit.org) has the ability to define
PLUGINS, and in my effort
to integrate Rexx2Nrx to an existing IDE (which Kermit Kiser built for
NetRexx with his
NetRexxSrcipt (www.kermitkiser.com) ....

... I would like to

1.) define Syntax Hightlighting for oorexx 4.0 for Jedit (which is FREE
and OPEN SOURCE)
2.) Integrate my current Rexx2Nrx efforts with yours.

First step:

   Could you send me some list of all 'reserved' ooRexx Verbs, Words,
Builtin Functions,
Predefined Classes, Predefined Methods, etc (in any Format for any
Editor) to [hidden email],
please.

   I could then write a small Rexx program transforming that to the
Jedit Style, and we could integrate
the available tools a bit...

Please let me know your opinions, and whether you are willing/able to
support us in this case.
.
Thanks in advance,
Tom.

[Thomas.Schneider.Wien]

Hello David & all,
   sorry that I have NOT expressed myself clearly enough :-(

I *do know*, that there are *NO RESERVED WORDS*  in REXX (as in
NetRexx), and the sub-key
words are only valid in Context.

By the way, my REXX Parser (part of Rexx2Nrx)   *honours* this rule!

Also, I DO know, that, for some Editors, (cannot recall their name yet,
will have to look at my books)
*do syntax HIGHTLIGHTING for Rexx* (based on regular expressions, as far
as I do know...

Question to REXXLA (Rick, You, and Mark Miesfeld) was, if you *do have
any* EDITOR
Syntax highlighting profile (for ooRexx 4.0) *at your desk*,
*or* if I would have to start from scratch ...

Kind regards,
Tom.

PS: Please *do understand* that I'm no novice.

My Parser, currently, understands REXX, PL/I and COBOL as well....
=================================================================
sefeldwas


David Ashley schrieb:

>
> Thomas -
>
> First, there are no 'reserved' words in any version of Rexx (I am not
> sure about NetRexx since it is really a Java variant). There are only
> keywords and subkeywords. Keywords are determined by their context so
> a really good syntax highlighter will have to actually parse the code
> to determine if a word is a keyword, subkeyword, or just a plain
> variable name. Most highlighters that I have used don't parse the
> program, they just look for words from a list and highlight them if
> they are found. Slickedit goes a little further and looks for words
> immediately follow by a '(' character and they become highlighted as
> function names.
>
> So the list would not be a simple list of words. In some cases a word
> is both a keyword and a subkeyword depending on the context. In any
> case there is no "list" that I am aware of. And even if there was one,
> it would probably become non comprehensive quickly as far as ooRexx is
> concerned. We have no qualms about adding new keywords and subkeywords
> where is makes sense to do so.
>
> Thanks,
> W. David Ashley
> IBM AIX Build Services
> Open Object Rexx Team
> Office Phone: [phone] T/L 363-5751
> Mobile Phone: [phone]
>
>
> Inactive hide details for Thomas Schneider ---01/27/2010 12:43:59
> PM---Hello David Ashley, Rick,Thomas Schneider ---01/27/2010 12:43:59
> PM---Hello David Ashley, Rick,
>
>                         *Thomas Schneider <[hidden email]>*
>                         Sent by: [hidden email]
>
>                         01/27/2010 12:35 PM
>                         Please respond to
>                         RexxLA Members mailing list
>                         <[hidden email]>
>
>
>
> To
>
> RexxLA Members mailing list <[hidden email]>
>
> cc
>
> IBM Netrexx <[hidden email]>
>
> Subject
>
> [RexxLA] REXX (open Object Rexx) Plugin for JEdit.
>
>
>
>
> Hello David Ashley, Rick,
>
>   I do know that Jedit (www.Jedit.org) has the ability to define
> PLUGINS, and in my effort
> to integrate Rexx2Nrx to an existing IDE (which Kermit Kiser built for
> NetRexx with his
> NetRexxSrcipt (www.kermitkiser.com) ....
>
> ... I would like to
>
> 1.) define Syntax Hightlighting for oorexx 4.0 for Jedit (which is FREE
> and OPEN SOURCE)
> 2.) Integrate my current Rexx2Nrx efforts with yours.
>
> First step:
>
>   Could you send me some list of all 'reserved' ooRexx Verbs, Words,
> Builtin Functions,
> Predefined Classes, Predefined Methods, etc (in any Format for any
> Editor) to [hidden email],
> please.
>
>   I could then write a small Rexx program transforming that to the
> Jedit Style, and we could integrate
> the available tools a bit...
>
> Please let me know your opinions, and whether you are willing/able to
> support us in this case.
> .
> Thanks in advance,
> Tom.
>
> _______________________________________________
> rexxla-members mailing list -- mailto:[hidden email]
> http://rice.safedataisp.net/mailman/listinfo/rexxla-members
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> rexxla-members mailing list -- mailto:[hidden email]
> http://rice.safedataisp.net/mailman/listinfo/rexxla-members
>  

[Mike Cowlishaw-2]

David is quite right; to try and summarise:

Rexx has no reserved words, except in the context of a particular clause.
For example, you can have a variable called 'to' ... but in "do i=1 to 10"
the 'to' is reserved.

This is a lot better than languages such as C or ALGOL, which cannot add
to their global 'reserved words' list.  But still meant that one could not
add to the (small) reserved words list in any particular Clause.

So, with the benefit of hindsight, NetRexx has no reserved words.  This is
the only option for a language that is interpreted/executed from source
and that will need to be extended in the future (that is, has a future).

> PS: Please *do understand* that I'm no novice.

A programming language is a rough old thing ... it's trying to make real
people's models of computers match what computers can actually do (and
vice versa).  Until you've designed three or four, you should probably
consider yourself in the 'learner' category, if not 'novice'  :-))

Mike





Unless stated otherwise above:
IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
741598.
Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://ns.hursley.ibm.com/pipermail/ibm-netrexx/attachments/20100127/8110c220/attachment.html

[Thomas.Schneider.Wien]

Hello Mike & all,
   .... sorry when there is *any mis-understanding*  :-(

I do know the SYNTAX and SEMANTICS of both Rexx and NetRexx quite well.....

What I am TRYING to do here, is to integrate my PARSER (which does now
understand
COBOL, PL/I, classic Rexx, ooRexx (a bit), and NetRexx) with Kermit
Kiser's NetRexxScript
effort  ....

I'm NOT asking for 'reserved words' (also I call them so (my failure!))

What I would like to do is to integrate (with Kermit's help) the new
version of
my software to Jedit (as a PLUGIN).

This, at the first step, will enable you to type in 'classic Rexx
Programs', get syntax highlighting (and errors, and warnings, while you
type them in) ...

And translate if later to what you want ... (NetRexx or Java)

The whole project is rather big, but without any support, *or interest*
!!! :-(

I'm nearly giving up ...

Thomas.

============================================================
Mike Cowlishaw schrieb:

> David is quite right; to try and summarise:
>
> Rexx has no reserved words, except in the context of a particular
> clause.  For example, you can have a variable called 'to' ... but in
> "do i=1 to 10" the 'to' is reserved.  
>
> This is a lot better than languages such as C or ALGOL, which cannot
> add to their global 'reserved words' list.  But still meant that one
> could not add to the (small) reserved words list in any particular
> Clause.
>
> So, with the benefit of hindsight, NetRexx has no reserved words.
>  This is the only option for a language that is interpreted/executed
> from source and that will need to be extended in the future (that is,
> has a future).
>
> > PS: Please *do understand* that I'm no novice.
>
> A programming language is a rough old thing ... it's trying to make
> real people's models of computers match what computers can actually do
> (and vice versa).  Until you've designed three or four, you should
> probably consider yourself in the 'learner' category, if not 'novice'
>  :-))
>
> Mike
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> /
> /
>
> /Unless stated otherwise above:
> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> number 741598.
> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
> 3AU/
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ibm-netrexx mailing list
> [hidden email]
>
>