Charles Mills wrote:
Thank you -- I did not know about not. I see here
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/operator_alternative that there is a
whole family of these including not_eq.
I have encountered IBM files that used the C++ trigraphs: ??< for { and so
forth. What an unreadable
On Thu, 9 Aug 2018 15:14:21 -0400, Tony Harminc wrote:
>
>>>It's worth getting a copy of the SHARE ÆCS report to see what the
>>>state of character encoding and standardization was like in 1989.
>>>
>On 8 August 2018 at 13:03, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
>> Is it available?
>
>I thought I had seen it on
On 8 August 2018 at 13:03, Paul Gilmartin
<000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 23:38:07 -0400, Tony Harminc wrote:
>>It's worth getting a copy of the SHARE ÆCS report to see what the
>>state of character encoding and standardization was like in 1989.
>>
> I
On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 10:23 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 09:55:08 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
Thank you -- I did not know about not. I see here
https://en.cppreference.com/w/cp
and the price is right.
>
> Charles
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
> Behalf Of Steve Smith
> Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 1:06 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: EBCDIC (was
HxD highly recommended, and the price is right.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Steve Smith
Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 1:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EBCDIC (was: Json table characters
quot; and get substituted even in string
literals and comments.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Paul Gilmartin
Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 12:07 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EBCDIC (wa
I'll second that recommendation... HxD is very useful, and well-designed.
I'll also second the notion of a long vacation in Italy. I've done that,
but it's much too long ago.
sas
On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 3:04 PM, Nightwatch RenBand wrote:
> Wow. Exciting for an old Dinosaur to actually be able
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 11:08:36 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>Yes, ??= is the trigraph for #. Talk about hash!
>
>Trigraphs go away in C++17.
>
Strongly opposed by IBM.
Replaced in string literals. But according to what CCSID? I'm trying not to
envision the anguish of the compiler writer confronti
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 11:08:36 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>Yes, ??= is the trigraph for #. Talk about hash!
>
>Trigraphs go away in C++17.
>
Then what happens? ISO Latin only? ??=pragma codepage ...? Other (specify)?
-- gil
-
Wow. Exciting for an old Dinosaur to actually be able to contribute
something.
The HxD Hex Editor https://mh-nexus.de/en/hxd/ (or many other places).
Or perhaps another PC based Hex editor can be SO very useful when dealing
with finding out just what the heck is actually in ASCII, or EBCDIC, or an
: EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 09:55:08 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>Thank you -- I did not know about not. I see here
>https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/operator_alternative that there is
>a whole family of these including not_eq.
>
>I have
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 09:55:08 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>Thank you -- I did not know about not. I see here
>https://en.cppreference.com/w/cpp/language/operator_alternative that there is
>a whole family of these including not_eq.
>
>I have encountered IBM files that used the C++ trigraphs: ??< fo
On Wed, 8 Aug 2018 06:52:58 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
>I got into the habit of <> for not equal in Rexx for that reason. Looking at
>Cowlishaw now I see that there is no strict variant of <>.
>
Indeed. Sometimes, contemptuously, I've used ( 1 - ( X == Y ) ). ( I hadn't
yet
learned "\==".)
sly)
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of David Crayford
Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 8:54 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
Yes, of course \ thanks for the correct
Yes, of course \ thanks for the correction. Lua uses ~ which is also a
code page issue. But it also has a "not" keyword which I like. C++ also
has "not" but it's not commonly used.
On 8/08/2018 9:52 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
I got into the habit of <> for not equal in Rexx for that reason. Loo
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2018 4:15 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu
Subject: EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 14:48:30 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
&
rayford
Sent: Wednesday, August 8, 2018 6:43 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
For REXX I have used the / operator for years now which is portable. The
logical not character has not aged well.
On 8/08/2018 9:36 PM, Seymour J Metz wrote:
> Yea
REXX.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of David
Crayford
Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2018 10:19 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu
Subject: Re: EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
On 8/08/2
David Crayford
Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2018 10:19 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu
Subject: Re: EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
On 8/08/2018 4:15 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
> What's the history of IBM-1047? Why does it seem to be controversial?
> Does it have the same set of printable glyp
On 7 August 2018 at 16:15, Paul Gilmartin
<000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
> What's the history of IBM-1047?
It was IBM's answer to the SHARE ASCII/EBCDIC Character Set [ÆCS] Task
Force report "ASCII and EBCDIC Character Set and Code Issues in
Systems Application
Architectu
Mills
Sent: Tuesday, August 7, 2018 7:34 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
Isn't there a pragma tag codepage?
CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity.
Original message From: David Crayford
Date: 8/7/18 7:19 PM (GMT
Isn't there a pragma tag codepage?
CharlesSent from a mobile; please excuse the brevity.
Original message From: David Crayford
Date: 8/7/18 7:19 PM (GMT-08:00) To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re:
EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
On 8/08/2018 4:15 AM,
On 8/08/2018 4:15 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
What's the history of IBM-1047? Why does it seem to be controversial?
Does it have the same set of printable glyphs as IBM-037 or IBM-500?
What need impelled it?
Good question! Do you know the answer? And don't get me started on the
line-feed/newlin
DU
Subject: (External):EBCDIC (was: Json table characters)
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 14:48:30 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>>Don't we celebrate diversity.
>
>In cusine, il va sans dire. In character sets, not so much. With the advent of
>Unicode and UTF-8, I wish those other code pages wou
On Tue, 7 Aug 2018 14:48:30 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>>Don't we celebrate diversity.
>
>In cusine, il va sans dire. In character sets, not so much. With the advent of
>Unicode and UTF-8, I wish those other code pages would go away. Or at least
>that every OS tagged character files with the c
26 matches
Mail list logo
