ML> If you have covered all the run-time bases with your "when"

I don't know any other language that bombs itself if the condition falls
out of the covered cases in the CASE/Select statement.  It's more like
a series of if-then-else-if-then and do nothing if it's not matched.  I
think if it were to complain it should complain right away at the execution
time that something must be coded for the Otherwise statement, "NOP" or
whatever, and not crash the program because the programmer forgets to put
a NOP.  It'd be friendly if it can forewarn the programmer.

 ML> If your major problem is typos in variable names, you should stick
 ML> with a "strongly typed" language.  Unlike REXX, Pascal
(for example)

If I have a choice between the two within the OS/2 env I'd go Pascal!

 ML> I do my coding a little hunk at a
 ML> time, as carefully as I can, and test each hunk at its boundaries
 ML> before going on to the next one.  When coding in REXX, placing
 ML> temporary 'say' clauses in strategic places is the best debugging aid. 
 ML> If desperate, use TRACE.

That's basically what I am doing, but it's painstakingly slow, and when
there is a problem you have to put quite a few 'say' and TRACE is pretty
ugly and again, slow to monitor the progress.

--- GEcho 1.11+