Gil, Longest line ... perhaps 3x71 or 4x71 + <something-less-than-71>.
If only it were that easy... the records split at 72 (+). No way to get the records produced without continuation. - KB ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Monday, July 13, 2020 8:55 PM, Paul Gilmartin <0000000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote: > On Mon, 13 Jul 2020 14:40:21 +0000, Seymour J Metz wrote: > > > Yes, but you will still need to insert the blank line as a terminator. If > > there are leading blanks then you may need manual correction with, e.g., > > TJ. If I had to do it often then I'd write an EDIT macro and be done with > > it. > > Is this better, or even simpler, than the Rexx script that Lionel et al. > proposed? > > And, what's the longest line the OP expects? Could the OP just use long lines > and eliminate the concatenation complexity? > > -- gil > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
