This is NOT an attempt to say "You shouldn't want to do this", it's a straight
question: Why DO you need to do this? I can't say that I've ever had the need
in (gulp) over 40 years of writing Rexx. So perhaps we can find another way to
satisfy the requirement?
-Original Message-
From: I
I write a lot of REXX code using mainframe REXX.
I don't use other REXXs.
In my routines, I always start my subroutines with the name of the
routine left justified and, therefore, no comments between the start of the
line and the routine's name.
I have a routine that I copy into my REXXs that has
I don't know of a way that's built in to TSO-REXX. But if the need is
important enough, you can always include the name of the caller as an arg in
the call.
In my own REXX execs I always start with the following:
parse source . calltype self .
SELF is the name of the routine, so if it has t
>Which REXX on what operating system do you use?
ibm
MVS : z/OS 02.04.00
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:33:10 +0100, Mike Beer wrote:-
>Which REXX on what operating system do you use?
>
>-Original Message-
>From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
>Weizman arbel
>Sent: Donnerstag,
On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 08:33:10 +0100, Mike Beer wrote:
>Which REXX on what operating system do you use?
>
Regina, for example, has traceback().
That would be a good Idea for enhancement to TSO REXX.
But even that just writes to stderr, although that could be
redirected to a file by shell and read w
Which REXX on what operating system do you use?
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Weizman arbel
Sent: Donnerstag, 6. Februar 2025 08:27
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: How to identify caller of subroutine in REXX
is it possible to retrieve the nam
