That works very nicely and hands stuff out for processing by an editor that has many years' worth of Rexx macros built into it.-cranioscopical
I'm not sure I follow you. I thought the point of this kind of tool was to avoid using the editor itself, while gaining extra benefit from scripts already written for it. That is, instead of loading your editor, you'd run your scripts with a free-standing REXX interpreter via CHS. Is that what you meant?
In my case, I have, or rather had at work, a myriad AWK scripts plus a much smaller number of SED scripts. As first written under DOS or for use in a DOS box, these were run from the command line using redirection and sometimes pipes because that's how you did it in those days, and seems to be the standard Unix method for running Unixish tools. Often they were wrapped in batch files. More recently I configured certain scripts as user tools in editors like TED Notepad, Notetab Pro (NTP), and HippoEDIT. NTP can even keep the scripts inside its own clipbook (macro) libraries. The editors all send a marked block of text to the script, receive the transformed text back, and over-write the original marked block. This works by STDIN/STDOUT without temporary files (or at least without them being visible to the operator). I see that mouser's example PERL script is specifically written to use files as IO rather than STDIN/STDOUT. I'd rather avoid having to change my scripts that currently work by STDIN/STDOUT, which is why I'd like to have STDIN/STDOUT offered as an alternative method.
Recent Posts
) I use it because it's WordStar style. Some phrase expanders fail with it. When you try to trigger the short form, they don't enter anything into the file. The editor behaves as if Ctrl+V only had been pressed. I checked this with clipboard enhancer ArsClip, 
Thanks!
It must be right, then... 