Re: First beta of bREXX 1.1.0 now available
|
On Mon, Nov 4, 2024 at 3:40?PM Martin Scheffler via <San-Lorenzo= [email protected]> wrote: I have installed the binary distribution via VMARC on the MECAFF user. There is a change how REXX tracing works which is disturbing EENEW's internal machinery.
Now that the hard work for bREXX 1.1.0 is done, I'm going to start playing with EENEW.? I'm really excited to try it!
My workaround is to begin all REXX programs with "TRACE 'Off'".
Note that you can also easily back out to the prior bREXX (probably v1.0.1), by renaming the new BREXX TEXT file and re-IPLing CMS.
?TRACE 'Negative' behaves the same as TRACE 'Errors' but these should differ.? The new bREXX has changed in the way, that TRACE 'Negative' does trace host commands with a positive return code but these should not be traced by TRACE 'Negative'.
I did indeed change stuff in the area of host command return code processing, because Cowlishaw's?Rexx separates SIGNAL ON FAILURE (negative RC) from SIGNAL ON ERROR (non-zero RC).? I wasn't aware of TRACE NEGATIVE, and in fact it isn't documented in The Rexx Language 2nd ed. (TRL2) or in the ANSI Rexx Standard.? Both of those have TRACE NORMAL, and since they both say to only test the first character (i.e., "N"), TRACE NEGATIVE is legal.? TRL2 documents TRACE NORMAL as the same as TRACE FAILURE - i.e., display commands with negative return codes.
So, yes, you're right, TRACE N should behave the same as TRACE F, not like TRACE E.? I'll open up an issue and start looking at it.
Ross
|
