Re: qsh from cl

Personally I think the idea of a whole pile of parameters with no keywords
would be even uglier than the verbose string the CL prompter produces.
Despite the perceived ugliness including the keywords removes pretty much
all the possible ambiguity.

If I was that horrified I think I would write a CL "prettifier" in Python,
but I've been looking at CL so long I find the prompts comforting.

One argument for *BCAT and *TCAT vs pipes etc is that there is no
possibility of a character translation error if the source gets moved
around.


On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 9:32 AM, John Yeung <gallium.arsenide@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On Tue, Mar 6, 2018 at 3:21 PM, Musselman, Paul
<pmusselman@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

I've heard [letting the prompter format CL code] is good practice, just

in case IBM re-arranges a parameter on you.

Yes, this is the standard advice. It is, without a doubt, safer to do
this. But it is just so fugly that I have difficulty doing it.

Besides being ridiculously verbose, using the prompter also destroys
indentation. I mean, it's really just painful to read.

John Y.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: https://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at https://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

Please contact support@xxxxxxxxxxxx for any subscription related
questions.

Help support midrange.com by shopping at amazon.com with our affiliate
link: http://amzn.to/2dEadiD