Jon Diercks <[log in to unmask]> said
 
(snipped)
>On the other hand, if by getting hung up on the semantics we've strayed from
>the original intent of the enhancement, then I'd suggest dumping the ;RAW
>keyword in favor of ;NONUM.  This would be more precise to the intent of the
>function - force :PRINT to assume that there are *no* line numbers in the
>file.  By abandoning the connotations associated with the word RAW we are
>free to narrow the scope of the enhancement to just what it says.  So if
>;NONUM were the keyword then I'd say that CCTLs should be treated the same
>as before, blank them out.
 
I totally agree with John.  This is the option name I could not think of - NONUM
- in my previous message.
 
>In this case, I would not see any need for an 'opposite' keyword, it would
>just become an extension of the ;UNN / ;NUM syntax, thus:
>
>   PRINT [[FILE=]filename]
>         [[;OUT=]outfile]
>         [[;START=]m]
>         [[;END=]n]
>         [[;PAGE=]p]
>         [;{UNN}]
>           {NUM}
>           {NONUM}
 
>...where ;UNN continues to be the default and both ;UNN and ;NUM behave the
>same as they always did, and ;NONUM forces the assumption that there are no
>line numbers in the file.  The only thing slightly unintuitive about this
>syntax is that if you have a file with digits at the end-of-record which are
>not really line numbers, and you want the file to be printed with relative
>numbering shown, you would have to say:
 
>   :PRINT myfile;NONUM;NUM
 
I believe NONUM has to be a parameter on its own (not an option to UNN,NUM) if
we are going to be able to say NONUM;NUM.  I like the concept though.
 
>I could live with that.  If I really *really* want RAW, I can use :COPY or
>:FCOPY
 
I would prefer a new parameter to cater for this. I would like it called RAW and
to give us a completely transparent 'print'.
 
I notice, from testing the PRINT command, that it currently ignores the CCTL.
This means that RAW would give us a new option that we do not currently have.
It's opposite could be CHAR which would also be a new option (no CCTL, no
unprintable characters).
 
Jeanette Nutsford
[log in to unmask]