From: Michael L. <ml...@lu...> - 2005-10-28 12:01:57
|
A while back Lee Peeding was asking about RxWinExec return codes in comp.lang.rexx so I looked it up in RexxUtil.c. hhhmmm, only thing is that thing cranks back all sorts of odd numbers now that I try the function and I sure don't see that in the source code. What am I missing... again!? (<rant>Blasted fancy stuff that can be done in C!</rant>) Thought to offer that function to the folks in comp.lang.rexx currently looking to not see the command line being executed. It looks like it will serve that purpose. However I found it mangles slashes if you hand it "dir /s" to execute. Looks like "dir \\s" is what actually is tried to be executed. Anyway, trying to better understand this function before we write a Sys* named function that starts programs cross platform, returns PID's, waits for processes vs "forking" them, etc... Mainly the RC's was enough to have me scratching my head, now slash mangling... oh fun! TIA! Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ |
From: <le...@sa...> - 2005-10-28 12:11:26
|
Michael, I was thinking of offering the same suggestion on comp.lang.rexx (RxWinExec), but I wasn't fully sure what platform the OP was on and I haven't been where I could determine if RxWinExec was available on OS/2 (if in fact that is what the OP is using). Is RxWinExec available on OS/2? If that is what the OP is using and it is available, then it would surely answer their problem, since RxWinExec can execute its program completely hidden. Lee -----Original Message----- From: oor...@li... [mailto:oor...@li...] On Behalf Of Michael Lueck Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 8:02 AM To: oor...@li... Subject: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? A while back Lee Peeding was asking about RxWinExec return codes in comp.lang.rexx so I looked it up in RexxUtil.c. hhhmmm, only thing is that thing cranks back all sorts of odd numbers now that I try the function and I sure don't see that in the source code. What am I missing... again!? (<rant>Blasted fancy stuff that can be done in C!</rant>) Thought to offer that function to the folks in comp.lang.rexx currently looking to not see the command line being executed. It looks like it will serve that purpose. However I found it mangles slashes if you hand it "dir /s" to execute. Looks like "dir \\s" is what actually is tried to be executed. Anyway, trying to better understand this function before we write a Sys* named function that starts programs cross platform, returns PID's, waits for processes vs "forking" them, etc... Mainly the RC's was enough to have me scratching my head, now slash mangling... oh fun! TIA! Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oor...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel |
From: Rick M. <obj...@gm...> - 2005-10-28 12:16:52
|
The "WinExec" part of the name should be a clue to how portable this is. This is just a simple stub to an existing Windows API (and an old one, at that). On 10/28/05, le...@sa... <le...@sa...> wrote: > > Michael, > I was thinking of offering the same suggestion on comp.lang.rexx > (RxWinExec), but I wasn't fully sure what platform the OP was on and I > haven't been where I could determine if RxWinExec was available on OS/2 > (if in fact that is what the OP is using). > > Is RxWinExec available on OS/2? If that is what the OP is using and it > is available, then it would surely answer their problem, since RxWinExec > can execute its program completely hidden. > > Lee > > -----Original Message----- > From: oor...@li... > [mailto:oor...@li...] On Behalf Of Michael > Lueck > Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 8:02 AM > To: oor...@li... > Subject: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? > > > A while back Lee Peeding was asking about RxWinExec return codes in > comp.lang.rexx so I looked it up in RexxUtil.c. hhhmmm, only thing is > that thing cranks back all sorts of odd numbers now that I try the > function and I sure don't see that in the source code. What am I > missing... again!? (<rant>Blasted fancy stuff that can be done in > C!</rant>) > > Thought to offer that function to the folks in comp.lang.rexx currently > looking to not see the command line being executed. It looks like it > will serve that purpose. > > However I found it mangles slashes if you hand it "dir /s" to execute. > Looks like "dir \\s" is what actually is tried to be executed. > > Anyway, trying to better understand this function before we write a Sys* > named function that starts programs cross platform, returns PID's, waits > for processes vs "forking" them, etc... Mainly the RC's was enough to > have me scratching my head, now slash mangling... oh fun! > > TIA! > > Michael Lueck > Lueck Data Systems > http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. > Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course > Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 > Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > Oor...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. > Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course > Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 > Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > Oor...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel > |
From: <le...@sa...> - 2005-10-28 12:23:55
|
Ah - good point Rick :-) Lee -----Original Message----- From: oor...@li... [mailto:oor...@li...] On Behalf Of Rick McGuire Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 8:16 AM To: oor...@li... Subject: Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? The "WinExec" part of the name should be a clue to how portable this is. This is just a simple stub to an existing Windows API (and an old one, at that). On 10/28/05, le...@sa... <le...@sa... <mailto:le...@sa...> > wrote: Michael, I was thinking of offering the same suggestion on comp.lang.rexx (RxWinExec), but I wasn't fully sure what platform the OP was on and I haven't been where I could determine if RxWinExec was available on OS/2 (if in fact that is what the OP is using). Is RxWinExec available on OS/2? If that is what the OP is using and it is available, then it would surely answer their problem, since RxWinExec can execute its program completely hidden. Lee -----Original Message----- From: oor...@li... [mailto:oor...@li...] On Behalf Of Michael Lueck Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 8:02 AM To: oor...@li... Subject: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? A while back Lee Peeding was asking about RxWinExec return codes in comp.lang.rexx so I looked it up in RexxUtil.c. hhhmmm, only thing is that thing cranks back all sorts of odd numbers now that I try the function and I sure don't see that in the source code. What am I missing... again!? (<rant>Blasted fancy stuff that can be done in C!</rant>) Thought to offer that function to the folks in comp.lang.rexx currently looking to not see the command line being executed. It looks like it will serve that purpose. However I found it mangles slashes if you hand it "dir /s" to execute. Looks like "dir \\s" is what actually is tried to be executed. Anyway, trying to better understand this function before we write a Sys* named function that starts programs cross platform, returns PID's, waits for processes vs "forking" them, etc... Mainly the RC's was enough to have me scratching my head, now slash mangling... oh fun! TIA! Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oor...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel> ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oor...@li... https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel |
From: Rick M. <obj...@gm...> - 2005-10-28 12:17:16
|
All it does is pass back the return code from the WinExec API. If the value is greater than 32, then the function worked. Less than 32 is an error return code. I believe dir is implemented as a shell command, not as an executable file, so that won't work as a directly invoked thing anyway. On 10/28/05, Michael Lueck <ml...@lu...> wrote: > > A while back Lee Peeding was asking about RxWinExec return codes in > comp.lang.rexx so I looked it up in RexxUtil.c. hhhmmm, only thing is tha= t > thing cranks back all sorts of odd numbers now that I try the function an= d > I > sure don't see that in the source code. What am I missing... again!? > (<rant>Blasted fancy stuff that can be done in C!</rant>) > > Thought to offer that function to the folks in comp.lang.rexx currently > looking > to not see the command line being executed. It looks like it will serve > that > purpose. > > However I found it mangles slashes if you hand it "dir /s" to execute. > Looks > like "dir \\s" is what actually is tried to be executed. > > Anyway, trying to better understand this function before we write a Sys* > named > function that starts programs cross platform, returns PID's, waits for > processes vs "forking" them, etc... Mainly the RC's was enough to have me > scratching my head, now slash mangling... oh fun! > > TIA! > > Michael Lueck > Lueck Data Systems > http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. > Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course > Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 > Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > Oor...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel > |
From: Michael L. <ml...@lu...> - 2005-10-28 13:09:00
|
On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:10:42 -0400, Rick McGuire wrote: >All it does is pass back the return code from the WinExec API. If the value is greater than 32, then the function worked. Less than 32 is an error return code. dua!!! Have to set the Rexx RC first, then return valid function to keep the interpreter happy. I see it now!!! Man I like Rexx w/ plain and simply "return foo" and it does it! ;-) C has to make things sooooo complicated! Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ |
From: Rick M. <obj...@gm...> - 2005-10-28 13:23:51
|
Well, with the new native function interface, this function just does this: return WinExec((LPSTR)command, CmdShow); On 10/28/05, Michael Lueck <ml...@lu...> wrote: > > On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:10:42 -0400, Rick McGuire wrote: > > >All it does is pass back the return code from the WinExec API. If the > value is greater than 32, then the function worked. Less than 32 is an er= ror > return code. > > dua!!! Have to set the Rexx RC first, then return valid function to keep > the > interpreter happy. I see it now!!! Man I like Rexx w/ plain and simply > "return > foo" and it does it! ;-) C has to make things sooooo complicated! > > Michael Lueck > Lueck Data Systems > http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. > Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course > Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 > Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information > _______________________________________________ > Oorexx-devel mailing list > Oor...@li... > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel > |
From: <le...@sa...> - 2005-10-28 13:50:46
|
Hope beyond all hope - does this new native function return the Process ID?????? Lee -----Original Message----- From: oor...@li... [mailto:oor...@li...] On Behalf Of Rick McGuire Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 9:17 AM To: oor...@li... Subject: Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? Well, with the new native function interface, this function just does this: return WinExec((LPSTR)command, CmdShow); On 10/28/05, Michael Lueck <ml...@lu...> wrote: On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:10:42 -0400, Rick McGuire wrote: >All it does is pass back the return code from the WinExec API. If the value is greater than 32, then the function worked. Less than 32 is an error return code. dua!!! Have to set the Rexx RC first, then return valid function to keep the interpreter happy. I see it now!!! Man I like Rexx w/ plain and simply "return foo" and it does it! ;-) C has to make things sooooo complicated! Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oor...@li... <mailto:Oor...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel |
From: Rick M. <obj...@gm...> - 2005-10-28 13:55:18
|
Unfortunately, I was a bit overly optimistic about having this return the process id. It doesn't appear that API gives you any access to the created process. On 10/28/05, le...@sa... <le...@sa...> wrote: > > Hope beyond all hope - does this new native function return the Process > ID?????? > Lee > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* oor...@li... [mailto: > oor...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Rick McGuire > *Sent:* Friday, October 28, 2005 9:17 AM > *To:* oor...@li... > *Subject:* Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? > > Well, with the new native function interface, this function just does > this: > > return WinExec((LPSTR)command, CmdShow); > > > On 10/28/05, Michael Lueck <ml...@lu...> wrote: > > > > On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:10:42 -0400, Rick McGuire wrote: > > > > >All it does is pass back the return code from the WinExec API. If the > > value is greater than 32, then the function worked. Less than 32 is an = error > > return code. > > > > dua!!! Have to set the Rexx RC first, then return valid function to kee= p > > the > > interpreter happy. I see it now!!! Man I like Rexx w/ plain and simply > > "return > > foo" and it does it! ;-) C has to make things sooooo complicated! > > > > Michael Lueck > > Lueck Data Systems > > http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. > > Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course > > Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 > > Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more information > > _______________________________________________ > > Oorexx-devel mailing list > > Oor...@li... > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel > > > > |
From: <le...@sa...> - 2005-10-28 14:08:31
|
Rick, The "old" WinExec API appears to be what ooRexx is currently using in RxWinExec - what API are you thinking of using in its place? How long before a decision is made to no longer support Win95 (where WinExec originated)? Lee -----Original Message----- From: oor...@li... [mailto:oor...@li...] On Behalf Of Rick McGuire Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 9:55 AM To: oor...@li... Subject: Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? Unfortunately, I was a bit overly optimistic about having this return the process id. It doesn't appear that API gives you any access to the created process. On 10/28/05, le...@sa... <le...@sa... <mailto:le...@sa...> > wrote: Hope beyond all hope - does this new native function return the Process ID?????? Lee -----Original Message----- From: oor...@li... [mailto:oor...@li...] On Behalf Of Rick McGuire Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 9:17 AM To: oor...@li... Subject: Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? Well, with the new native function interface, this function just does this: return WinExec((LPSTR)command, CmdShow); On 10/28/05, Michael Lueck <ml...@lu...> wrote: On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:10:42 -0400, Rick McGuire wrote: >All it does is pass back the return code from the WinExec API. If the value is greater than 32, then the function worked. Less than 32 is an error return code. dua!!! Have to set the Rexx RC first, then return valid function to keep the interpreter happy. I see it now!!! Man I like Rexx w/ plain and simply "return foo" and it does it! ;-) C has to make things sooooo complicated! Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ <http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/> ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification <http://www.jboss.com/services/certification> for more information _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oor...@li... <mailto:Oor...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel |
From: Rick M. <obj...@gm...> - 2005-10-28 14:14:59
|
WinExec is just a simple stub to that API. I don't ever envision changing how it works. A new function is more likely, but it's pretty low on my priority list right now. However, if anybody is willing to write one, we're certainly willing to take a code contribution. That's how open source works (hint, hint). On 10/28/05, le...@sa... <le...@sa...> wrote: > > Rick, > The "old" WinExec API appears to be what ooRexx is currently using in > RxWinExec - what API are you thinking of using in its place? How long bef= ore > a decision is made to no longer support Win95 (where WinExec originated)? > Lee > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* oor...@li... [mailto: > oor...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Rick McGuire > *Sent:* Friday, October 28, 2005 9:55 AM > *To:* oor...@li... > *Subject:* Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? > > Unfortunately, I was a bit overly optimistic about having this return the > process id. It doesn't appear that API gives you any access to the create= d > process. > > On 10/28/05, le...@sa... <le...@sa... > wrote: > > > > Hope beyond all hope - does this new native function return the Process > > ID?????? > > Lee > > > > -----Original Message----- > > *From:* oor...@li... [mailto: > > oor...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Rick McGuire > > *Sent:* Friday, October 28, 2005 9:17 AM > > *To:* oor...@li... > > *Subject:* Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? > > > > Well, with the new native function interface, this function just does > > this: > > > > return WinExec((LPSTR)command, CmdShow); > > > > > > On 10/28/05, Michael Lueck <ml...@lu...> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:10:42 -0400, Rick McGuire wrote: > > > > > > >All it does is pass back the return code from the WinExec API. If th= e > > > value is greater than 32, then the function worked. Less than 32 is a= n error > > > return code. > > > > > > dua!!! Have to set the Rexx RC first, then return valid function to > > > keep the > > > interpreter happy. I see it now!!! Man I like Rexx w/ plain and simpl= y > > > "return > > > foo" and it does it! ;-) C has to make things sooooo complicated! > > > > > > Michael Lueck > > > Lueck Data Systems > > > http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. > > > Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course > > > Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 200= 5 > > > Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more informatio= n > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Oorexx-devel mailing list > > > Oor...@li... > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel > > > > > > > > |
From: <le...@sa...> - 2005-10-28 14:21:55
|
Oh how I wish I had the expertise to make a code contribution. In the mean time (for me on Windows anyway), a prime alternative to RxWinExec is Win32_ProcessStartup under WMI, but since the ooRexx ActiveX object does not perform as documented, I'll just wait patiently :-) (see Bug Report 1323259). Lee -----Original Message----- From: oor...@li... [mailto:oor...@li...] On Behalf Of Rick McGuire Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 10:15 AM To: oor...@li... Subject: Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? WinExec is just a simple stub to that API. I don't ever envision changing how it works. A new function is more likely, but it's pretty low on my priority list right now. However, if anybody is willing to write one, we're certainly willing to take a code contribution. That's how open source works (hint, hint). On 10/28/05, le...@sa... < le...@sa... <mailto:le...@sa...> > wrote: Rick, The "old" WinExec API appears to be what ooRexx is currently using in RxWinExec - what API are you thinking of using in its place? How long before a decision is made to no longer support Win95 (where WinExec originated)? Lee -----Original Message----- From: oor...@li... [mailto:oor...@li...] On Behalf Of Rick McGuire Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 9:55 AM To: oor...@li... Subject: Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? Unfortunately, I was a bit overly optimistic about having this return the process id. It doesn't appear that API gives you any access to the created process. On 10/28/05, le...@sa... < le...@sa... <mailto:le...@sa...> > wrote: Hope beyond all hope - does this new native function return the Process ID?????? Lee -----Original Message----- From: oor...@li... [mailto:oor...@li... <mailto:oor...@li...> ] On Behalf Of Rick McGuire Sent: Friday, October 28, 2005 9:17 AM To: oor...@li... Subject: Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? Well, with the new native function interface, this function just does this: return WinExec((LPSTR)command, CmdShow); On 10/28/05, Michael Lueck <ml...@lu... <mailto:ml...@lu...> > wrote: On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:10:42 -0400, Rick McGuire wrote: >All it does is pass back the return code from the WinExec API. If the value is greater than 32, then the function worked. Less than 32 is an error return code. dua!!! Have to set the Rexx RC first, then return valid function to keep the interpreter happy. I see it now!!! Man I like Rexx w/ plain and simply "return foo" and it does it! ;-) C has to make things sooooo complicated! Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ <http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/> ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005 Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification <http://www.jboss.com/services/certification> for more information _______________________________________________ Oorexx-devel mailing list Oor...@li... <mailto:Oor...@li...> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel |
From: Rick M. <obj...@gm...> - 2005-10-28 14:25:51
|
It might be a long wait....I don't have the Windows expertise either. It will require me to do a bit a research to figure out how to implement something like this. On 10/28/05, le...@sa... <le...@sa...> wrote: > > Oh how I wish I had the expertise to make a code contribution. In the mea= n > time (for me on Windows anyway), a prime alternative to RxWinExec is > Win32_ProcessStartup under WMI, but since the ooRexx ActiveX object does = not > perform as documented, I'll just wait patiently :-) (see Bug Report > 1323259). > Lee > > -----Original Message----- > *From:* oor...@li... [mailto: > oor...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Rick McGuire > *Sent:* Friday, October 28, 2005 10:15 AM > *To:* oor...@li... > *Subject:* Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? > > WinExec is just a simple stub to that API. I don't ever envision changing > how it works. A new function is more likely, but it's pretty low on my > priority list right now. However, if anybody is willing to write one, we'= re > certainly willing to take a code contribution. That's how open source wor= ks > (hint, hint). > > On 10/28/05, le...@sa... < le...@sa...> wrote: > > > > Rick, > > The "old" WinExec API appears to be what ooRexx is currently using in > > RxWinExec - what API are you thinking of using in its place? How long b= efore > > a decision is made to no longer support Win95 (where WinExec originated= )? > > Lee > > > > -----Original Message----- > > *From:* oor...@li... [mailto: > > oor...@li...] *On Behalf Of *Rick McGuire > > *Sent:* Friday, October 28, 2005 9:55 AM > > *To:* oor...@li... > > *Subject:* Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? > > > > Unfortunately, I was a bit overly optimistic about having this return > > the process id. It doesn't appear that API gives you any access to the > > created process. > > > > On 10/28/05, le...@sa... < le...@sa... > wrote: > > > > > > Hope beyond all hope - does this new native function return the > > > Process ID?????? > > > Lee > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > *From:* oor...@li... [mailto:oorexx-devel= -a...@li... > > > ] *On Behalf Of *Rick McGuire > > > *Sent:* Friday, October 28, 2005 9:17 AM > > > *To:* oor...@li... > > > *Subject:* Re: [Oorexx-devel] RxWinExec - Two of them? > > > > > > Well, with the new native function interface, this function just does > > > this: > > > > > > return WinExec((LPSTR)command, CmdShow); > > > > > > > > > On 10/28/05, Michael Lueck <ml...@lu... > wrote: > > > > > > > > On Fri, 28 Oct 2005 08:10:42 -0400, Rick McGuire wrote: > > > > > > > > >All it does is pass back the return code from the WinExec API. If > > > > the value is greater than 32, then the function worked. Less than 3= 2 is an > > > > error return code. > > > > > > > > dua!!! Have to set the Rexx RC first, then return valid function to > > > > keep the > > > > interpreter happy. I see it now!!! Man I like Rexx w/ plain and > > > > simply "return > > > > foo" and it does it! ;-) C has to make things sooooo complicated! > > > > > > > > Michael Lueck > > > > Lueck Data Systems > > > > http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. > > > > Get Certified Today * Register for a JBoss Training Course > > > > Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of > > > > 2005 > > > > Visit http://www.jboss.com/services/certification for more > > > > information > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > > Oorexx-devel mailing list > > > > Oor...@li... > > > > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel > > > > > > > > > > > > > |
From: Michael L. <ml...@lu...> - 2005-10-28 13:57:37
|
--Original Message Text--- From: le...@sa... Date: Fri, 28 Oct 2005 09:50:40 -0400 >Hope beyond all hope - does this new native function return the Process ID?????? I think Rick is talking about his "new wiz bang ooRexx" ideas and how much simpler Rexx callable C functions will be to code. We are getting geared up here to do some RexxUtil work and like I said cooking up a SysSomething... named thing to run programs, get PIDs, not have anything show up in the title or even PS if possible, etc... Trying to think ahead for *nix, OS/2 and Windows which makes for lots of options that each OS offers. Michael Lueck Lueck Data Systems http://www.lueckdatasystems.com/ |