That's neat, but what if you want #SAS code that runs on both #ASCII and #EBCDIC?

Or what if you are like me and want to avoid the <> trap?

SAS also offers the alpha-based EQ and NE operators, which perform "equal to" and "not equal to" comparisons.

I got in the habit of only using the character-based operators in part to avoid the <> trap. However, I'm doing maintenance coding tonight, and in trying to avoid a style clash, I fell into the <> trap again!

That's neat, but what if you want code that runs on both #ASCII and #EBCDIC?

Or what if you are like me and want to avoid the <> trap?

SAS also offers the alpha-based EQ and NE operators, which perform "equal to" and "not equal to" comparisons.

I got in the habit of only using the character-based operators in part to avoid the <> trap. However, I'm doing maintenance coding tonight, and in trying to avoid a style clash, I fell into the <> trap again!

#C23 removes #trigraphs.

So now you really need modern keyboards including # and \ and fancy brackets like [{}], and we cannot use #EBCDIC as source file encoding …

#C #posix #linux #programming

@Scmbradley You have a table in this document, page 100.
https://www.ibm.com/support/pages/sites/default/files/2022-09/SA22-7871-11.pdf

It might not be exactly what you look for but it's been useful for me in the past.

#ebcdic #zOS

RT @bortzmeyer
On the #curl mailing list, someone complains about the removal of #EBCDIC code.

#retroComputing #oldNotObsolete

@mia What is the + in #EBCDIC+?

Today, I found a bug that I'm responsible for. It's in a validation routine written in #COBOL on an #IBM i. I checked the value of characters by checking if they are < "A" or > "Z". I didn't keep in mind that with #EBCDIC encoding they are arranged differently :mastofacepalm: Thankfully the program hasn't been in use before last week and there haven't been any invalid data accepted yet.