Talking of editors, I checked my coding speed many years ago with ISPF edit on a heavy metal 3278-2 (green). I have never matched my speed with any other combination.
I was accustomed to soft tabs, nulls on etc, mind you. Years with the formless stream of ASCII mean I now can't match my old 3278-2 speed, even when I try theb old hardware :-) Roops --- "Mundus sine Caesaribus" On Thu, 28 Aug 2025, 16:50 Seymour J Metz, <sme...@gmu.edu> wrote: > Does KEDIT support SET PENDING these days? The absence of a compatible SET > PENDING is what kept me from adopting KEDIT or THE as my preferred PC > editor. > > -- > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 > עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי > נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר > > > > > ________________________________________ > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> on > behalf of Mark Boonie <boo...@us.ibm.com> > Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2025 11:21 AM > To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> > Subject: Re: Is HLASM efficient WAS: Telum and SpyreWAS: Vector > instruction performance > > > External Message: Use Caution > > > I don't want to get too far off topic, but it's a Kedit macro, Kedit being > a pretty faithful Windows based version of Xedit. It would need a bit of > rework to run in Xedit (where I'd probably make better use of the prefix > area), and it's tuned a bit to my coding style/preferences, so it's not > really suitable for "widely available", although I'll send it to anyone who > asks. > > - mb > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> On > > Behalf Of Colin Paice > > Sent: Thursday, August 28, 2025 10:54 AM > > To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Is HLASM efficient WAS: Telum and SpyreWAS: > Vector > > instruction performance > > > > Sounds like a good macro to make widely available! > > > > On Thu, 28 Aug 2025 at 15:30, Mark Boonie <boo...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > > > > > On Wednesday, August 27, 2025 8:40 PM, Jon Perryman wrote: > > > > > > > The transition to mixed case was painful for everyone except Gil, > > > > who seems to have loved it. > > > Speaking only for myself, I loved it as well. I didn't participate in > > > any self-study, but I *feel* it makes the comments easier to > > > understand, and both code and comments easier to read. For new files, > > > I write both code and comments in mixed case; uppercase is obviously > > > still required for operands such as text strings that are destined for > > > a console, etc. When I update an existing file, I do not change > > > existing comments to mixed case, and I decide on uppercase vs. mixed > > > case based on scope: if I add a self-contained subroutine then it > > > will likely have mixed-case comments, but if it's just a few lines > > > within an existing routine then I use whatever style is currently in > use. > > > > > > > Strange that no one mentions how they solved half a line in > > > > uppercase and switching to lowercase for the other half. Do people > > > > hold the shift key for half the line? > > > Editor macros. I type everything in lowercase, operands in one string > > > with no blanks, followed by comments, and my formatting macro splits > > > operands into multiple lines if necessary, formats comments with > > > appropriate capitalization (based on a reference file of acronyms), > > > and splits them across multiple lines as necessary. I didn't bother > > > going so far as to parse quoted strings that include blanks, so I > > > generally need to hand-format those lines (which are few). The need > > > to "massage" any resulting output lines is rare. > > > > > > I started writing code like this between 20 and 30 years ago. Nobody > > > has ever complained, either in-house or customers, although I have had > > > a couple of people remark "I didn't know you could use mixed-case like > > that." > > > > > > - mb > > > > > >
