comp.lang.rexx Google Group

Re: Memory usuage reduction

mlu...@lueckdatasystems.com (Michael Lueck) — Sat, 06 Sep 2008 02:19:18 UT

ML wrote:
I suspect Mr. Swift was running Rexx/ORexx on a platform other than OS/2.
Rexx programs on OS/2 must have the .CMD extension.

Re: Memory usuage reduction

spamg...@hotmai1.com (ML) — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 19:03:52 UT

>> Why wouldn't something along the lines of:
>> do forever
>> data=CharIn(source,,1024*1024)
>> CALL CharOut target,data
>> end

>> work?
> I do something very similar in my "compare.rex" program, except
> that I do two charin's. It has never caused any observable
> problems.
O well, why not. Let's try it with such a COMPARE.REX: ;-)

Re: Memory usuage reduction

steve.j.sw...@gmail.com (Steve Swift) — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:07:42 UT

I do something very similar in my "compare.rex" program, except that I
do two charin's. It has never caused any observable problems.
I set the buffer proportional to the size of the files being compared,
but with an upper limit (16MB as I recall) to prevent the progress bar's
progress becoming choppy.

rexxsql 2.5 installation problem

mister...@skynet.be (misteros2) — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:52:30 UT

- my config: redhat 5.2, oorexx 3.2, RexxSQL-2.5.tar.gz
- ./configure runs ok:
./configure --with-rexx=oorexx --with-db=mysql
Rexx/SQL has now been configured with the following options:
Rexx Interpreter: ooRexx (using oorexx-config)
Database: MySQL
Database headers in: /usr/include/mysql

rexxsql 2.5 installation problem

mister...@skynet.be (misteros2) — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:45:39 UT

Re: Memory usuage reduction

spamg...@hotmai1.com (ML) — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:59:23 UT

>> Using "CALL CharOut target,CharIn(source,,16*1024* 1024)" is (close
>> to) fatal...
> Maybe that's just an example of you using a 16MB buffer, rather than
> what you think you actually need to do?
That's right, in addition to 'mb16=""' and 'DROP mb16'. The problem also
occurs when not using the 'RxVariablePool': no 'free(buffer);'

Re: Memory usuage reduction

object.r...@gmail.com (Rick McGuire) — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 19:13:30 UT

ML wrote:
That's not the way the ooRexx memory system works. Each allocation is
not a malloc()/free(). The interpreter manages its own garbage
collected memory heap, and allocations are made from that heap. If a
request is unable to be fulfilled from the existing memory heap, a
garbage collection cycle is run, and if there still is no block of

Re: Memory usuage reduction

spamg...@hotmai1.com (ML) — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:42:29 UT

Re: Memory usuage reduction

jn.nntp.scrap...@wingsandbeaks.org.uk (Jeremy Nicoll - news posts) — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 17:37:45 UT

Maybe that's just an example of you using a 16MB buffer, rather than what
you think you actually need to do?
Why wouldn't something along the lines of:
do forever
data=CharIn(source,,1024*1024)
CALL CharOut target,data
end
work? Surely the size of 'data' will not grow?
(With suitable extra logic to stop the loop once all the data's been seen?)

Re: ooRexx vs Object Rexx

spamt...@spamtrap.invalid (Three Lefts) — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 07:17:53 UT

On Mon, 01 Sep 2008 06:52:41 +0100, Steve Swift
OK, thanks.

Re: ooRexx vs Object Rexx

steve.j.sw...@gmail.com (Steve Swift) — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 05:52:41 UT

They were roughly the same when IBM gave away the source. ooRexx didn't
include IBM's "Workbench" nor the RxFTP() package. This was ~8 years ago
(wild guess, feels like that to me).
Then Object REXX development stopped, and ooREXX took off, so they have
now diverged.
If you are fluent in Object Rexx then ooRexx can do it all, any

Re: ooRexx vs Object Rexx

wlfr...@ix.netcom.com (Dennis Lee Bieber) — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 00:45:10 UT

On Sun, 31 Aug 2008 16:00:28 -0700, Three Lefts
<spamt...@spamtrap.invalid> declaimed the following in comp.lang.rexx:
As I recall, the core Object REXX language was turned over to RLA to
become Open Object REXX... However, some IBM proprietary extensions
(IDE, GUI interface, etc.) were not included in the transfer.

ooRexx vs Object Rexx

spamt...@spamtrap.invalid (Three Lefts) — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 23:00:28 UT

I assume that ooRexx (from The Rexx Language Association):
[link]
is not the same as Object Rexx (from IBM):
[link]
Right?
Is Object Rexx available as a separate product from IBM?
The website above is cryptic about it's availability and says there

Go for ooRexx, Was: Re: Zip interface

mlu...@lueckdatasystems.com (Michael Lueck) — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 11:39:47 UT

Oh, that was it. Yes, try out ooRexx. The recent builds have been *quite* good. A good time to give ooRexx a try.
[link]

Re: Zip interface

spamt...@spamtrap.invalid (Three Lefts) — Sun, 31 Aug 2008 04:54:16 UT

On Sat, 30 Aug 2008 21:35:31 -0400, Michael Lueck
Oh. No, I was just curious as to which one you were using because I
need to find a new one. I've been using Quercus and there is no
development or support.
I would expect that if works with any, it would work with all -- just
like any DOS command.