Re: OPM vs. ILE

A couple of comments in response to Jim Essinger's contribution.

(1) Pedantic -- I believe the O in OPM stands for Original, not Old
(2) You don't need ILE to create a pgm that does all your file I/O. We use
OPM COBOL and from the beginning designed a high-level I/O handler which all
'application' pgms call and a low-level handler (containing the Select
clause etc.) that does the actual I/O. Only the high-level handler calls the
low-level handler, thus insulating regular programs from the real I/O. This
has served us well because record sizes frequently increase and when they
do, we only have to change the high- and low-level handlers.
(3) Pointers - we are using Pointers, though in a limited way, in OPM COBOL.
(4) In my view, it would be a very unusual company that could take advantage
of C, COBOL, CL and RPG to warrant putting an application under ILE. I could
see a combination of 2, maybe 3 but not more. Having said all that, I'd
still like to go to ILE COBOL because that's the only one that is going to
support parts of the COBOL 2002 standard. But that decision isn't mine to
take.

David Silber, Quality Consultant
HPD Software Ltd



This email and any attachments are strictly confidential and are intended
solely for the addressee. If you are not the intended recipient you must
not disclose, forward, copy or take any action in reliance on this message
or its attachments. If you have received this email in error please notify
the sender as soon as possible and delete it from your computer systems.
Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not
necessarily reflect those of HPD Software Limited or its affiliates.

 At present the integrity of email across the internet cannot be guaranteed
and messages sent via this medium are potentially at risk.  All liability
is excluded to the extent permitted by law for any claims arising as a re-
sult of the use of this medium to transmit information by or to
HPD Software Limited or its affiliates.