Posted by
Robert Schiller on
URL: http://ibm-netrexx.48.s1.nabble.com/Since-NetRexx-is-Java-tp678080p678085.html
Brad,
> One of the Reasons I suggested using the ++ and *= is because it is
> found in native Java. If NetRexx catches on with native Java
programmers
> as an alternative and easier way to write Java code they
> are going to be expecting to be able to use the ++, +=, *=, etc.
> I don't consider using ++ and += as a C/C++ thing, I consider it a Java
thing.
>
> In addition, since using long descriptive variables is an easy way of
self
> documentation, having the ++ or += does have its added benefits as
> I have said in earlier notes.
>
> What do you all think?
I chose to use NetRexx because I didn't like Java syntax. Now you're
proposing to make NetRexx more like Java? Why don't you just write your
code in straight Java in you like that syntax so much?
Robert Schiller
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
To unsubscribe from this mailing list ( ibm-netrexx ), please send a note to
[hidden email]
with the following message in the body of the note
unsubscribe ibm-netrexx <e-mail address>