Its also a bit of a blight on the scriptable telnet packages out there.
Whilst there are some shortcomings of REXX (e.g. only token multiple source
file support) most of the other comms packages around are worse still.
Hyperaccess supports vb but is almost entirely a bug. Tera-term's language
is more limited than REXX, and has problems on win2k. A few of the older
progs have pretty semi-decent languages (richer than zoc/rexx anyhow), but
they're typically unsupported with no continuing development, who knows
whether they will work with newer OS's, and/or have weird timing delays
because of having to run through various compatibility layers.

Dr. bad


>From a message by Kavanagh about Re: Re:1/2 on Topic:
> You well answered me, it is similar to the qwerty/Dvorak keyboard.
 > 
 > 
 > 
 > >From a message by Kemper3 about Re:1/2 on Topic:
 > > I think it has to do with people using Zoc.  Zoc doesn't take any 
 > sort of special setup to use for tradewars, there are public scripts 
 > available for it, it's still being updated, and you can use it 
 > without paying for it if you want to sit through the nag screen.  
 > Then, since people had REXX scripts for zoc, attac and swath decided 
 > to support it too, probably in hopes of winning over users.  REXX 
 > probably isn't the best language, but it works well for tradewars.  
 > At this point, it's probably mainly used because people already have 
 > stuff written in rexx and know the language.
 > 
 > On 27 Dec 2002 at 19:08, Kavanagh wrote:
 > 
 > > 
 > > Helpers, Terminal programs:
 > > 
 > > From my reading here and elsewhwere the latest Swath version
embraces ZOC (REXX, OS/2).
 > > 
 > > Has baffled me for years in TW. I despise microsoft crap but IBM
never supported OS/2 - deserved to die for that - why use REXX? lots of
excellent PC DOS terminal programs. Telemate, Qmodem, etc.
 > > 
 > > 
 > > 
 > >
 > 
 > 



--- FEddy 1.4.03/modPHX