Posted by
mcbrides on
URL: http://ibm-netrexx.48.s1.nabble.com/Since-NetRexx-is-Java-tp678080p678091.html
>Well, Jerry, I absolutely disagree.
>
Scott, I respect that fact.
>N + 1 or N++ or +=N as a stand-alone is NOT intuitive -- unless one has
>spent a lengthy apprentice-ship in "C" -- and if so, why then do you look
>for the powerful productivity assistance of NetRexx --surely C or native
>Java rolls off your tongue and fingers?
>
My post that triggered your response says it all. I beleive that if NetRexx
is to appeal to the experienced or professional, then the same utility of Java
should be supported in NetRexx. I'm not an advocate of any type or style of
language syntax or programing style (I have noce). But at least this much
should be done for NetRexx.
>I have much respect for your contributions on NetRexx but I think it's
>REXX, NOT JAVA. As another commentator has so sensibly written -- if you
>want Java constructs, use Java.
>
I'd love to embrace the java language, however... and I'm about to reveal my
cards here... I haven't the time or desire to learn it. NetRexx has allowed me
to enter the Java arena without all the cumbersome aspects of working in Java.
However, I still want the ability to take full advantage of the Java language
right down to the syntax if possible... in NetRexx.
>Many of us want NetRexx to reflect the clean, elegant, *understandable
>simplicity* of Rexx -- and NOT have it turn into a C-wannabee.
>
>The comment I DO agree with is "let's stop it" but -- please, let's stop it
>without adding needless unwanted complexity.
>
>Scott P
As I said above. I respect your point of view, however we do not agree. Thanks
for the dialog, it's refreshing to compare points of view with others.
>----------
>From: Jerry McBride <
[hidden email]>
>To:
[hidden email]
>Cc:
[hidden email]
>Subject: Re: Since NetRexx is Java.....
>Date: Friday, December 05, 1997 10:33 PM
>
>>Hello fellow NetRexxers,
>>
>>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.
>>
>
>I say, let it stop here. NetRexx is not clasicRexx, it's a language that
>allows
>programmers to develope Java code in an easy and effient manner. That said,
>if
>it can be done in Java, it should be able to be done in NetRexx...
>
>N+1... Great idea...
>--
>
--
/-------------------------------------\
| Jerry McBride (
[hidden email]) |
\-------------------------------------/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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>
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
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>