Re: [netrexx-pipelines] Ad ooRexx scopes, ... (Re: Migrate OS/2 pipelines to NetRexx Pipes

[J L. T. <jlt...@ma...>]

	I too was disappointed that specs field- and word-ranges aren't yet supported in NetRexx
Pipelines; I always found it so very useful for rearranging fields of records, and
there's no equivalent to that in the Unixish world.

Leslie

On 2022-06-13 05:04:49 hp...@we... wrote:
> Am 13.06.2022 um 02:27 schrieb ((ich)):
> > [...]
> > Hmm... no, that looks quite similar like the first case, so this
> > one too I will not convert to NetRexx Pipelines. But the third
> >
> > pipe is worth it:
> >> call RxPipe '< "' || fn || '"!l fs ; f1!stem loc.!spec fs 09 f1
> >> 1!stem n.'
>
> No-no-no-no:
> > Error (specs) - fs 09 f1 1 write - Unrecognized option: fs
>
> A quick glance into the documentation reveals:
> > (3) CMS only. Not yet implemented in NetRexx Pipelines
>
> Therefore this OS/2 pipe is converted to plain ooRexx without
>
> support from NetRexx Pipelines. Same for next one:
> > if syswinver() = 'WindowsNT 6.01' then,               /* Win7 only */
> >  gehon = '< C:\Windows\System32\drivers\etc\hosts',   /* mappings of
> > dotIP to host names */ '!spec fs # f1!strip!l!spec w2!'
> >   /* keep name only */ else gehon = ''
> > call RxPipe gehon 'literal localhost!stem honam.'     /* no sort as
> > ComboBox will do so */
>
> Again spec fs char is the show-stopper. Next one?
>
> > selni = ctlcbx~selected
> > call RxPipe '(end ?) var selni!a:lookup f1 master!spec f2',
> >  '!spec fs ; f1!strip!var fid!reverse!spec fs . f1!reverse!xlate!var
> > sfx', '?stem loc.!a:'
>
> Forget it, no way! Two times spec fs ... Next one is:
> >     call RxPipe '(end ?) var fid!strip /"/!get asis BIN',
> >      '!a:take 16 bytes!spec *-* c2x!var sig',
> >      '?a:!b:take 4 bytes!reverse!spec *-* c2x!var kml',
> >      '?b:!stem rst.'
>
> Finally, the perfect candidate for NetRexx Pipelines, read a file
> binary, sip off two strings from the beginning, convert and
> deliver them to ooRexx, also the untouched remnant of the file for
> further investigation. New thereby, maybe a challenge, are the two
> strings and an unknown number of records returned.
>
> But first I'll "rexxify" all skipped before I attack this one.
>
> /M.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> netrexx-pipelines mailing list
> net...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/netrexx-pipelines

--