Talk:Idiomatically determine all the characters that can be used for symbols: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(→ooRexx is an Interpreter of Classic Rexx (and MUCH more): Arbitration?) |
m (→ooRexx is an Interpreter of Classic Rexx (and MUCH more): added a comment about o-o languages.) |
||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
:::::: By no longer I meant that over the evolution of Rexx they were dropped. But you are right. |
:::::: By no longer I meant that over the evolution of Rexx they were dropped. But you are right. |
||
ooRexx does not support some features that are supported in some classic Rexxes. And I have enumerated most of them. --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 23:11, 15 September 2014 (UTC) |
ooRexx does not support some features that are supported in some classic Rexxes. And I have enumerated most of them. --[[User:Walterpachl|Walterpachl]] ([[User talk:Walterpachl|talk]]) 23:11, 15 September 2014 (UTC) |
||
:::::::: That the ooRexx is the next (or at least one of the next) evolution of Classic REXX, and is one major reason that ooRexx has it's own language section. One fact is that that first version (of Classic REXX) is executable with any and all Classic REXX interpreters (too many to list here), there are no exceptions that I know of --- nothing needs to be changes/modified for it to run. This is probably the main reason that the various object-oriented versions of other languages (in Rosetta Code) are in separate language sections, whether or not those o-o language versions could execute those non o-o versions. -- [[User:Gerard Schildberger|Gerard Schildberger]] ([[User talk:Gerard Schildberger|talk]]) 01:46, 17 September 2014 (UTC) |
|||
<br> |
<br> |
||