Re: QCMDEXC question

Mark Lazarus wrote:

> <<snip>>
>
>  I have come to realize that there is no silver bullet in I.T., so just use
> the best tools you have available and become good at it.  Our chosen
> platform is the /400.  Let's make it the best we can.  Asking IBM for some
> enhancements to CL is not unreasonable, IMHO.
>
>

Mark,

I agree. No silver bullets, get good at what you've got available.

Without drawing any real conclusions, I feel that the wind is blowing in
directions that don't necessarily include CL as a "strategic" language in Big
Blue's future.  I could be wrong.  Way back when, I even got rosy eyed about the
concept of SAA until it proved to be lowest common denominator.  Not that that's
a bad IT. choice, it's just a bad place to be in a competitive business
environment.  I'll  save you the grief of expanding on that one. :)

But back to the point at hand, being very very good at what's available is one
thing, rethinking your game plan when something else becomes available is
another.

I've seen IBM make very substantial improvements in RPG for the 400 so we can
make our applications more "robust".  The improvements in DDS have been nice.
New commands have reduced some programming time. But I'm left wondering about 
the
lack of effort on CL improvements.  The financial backing has been put
elsewhere.  Is CL as good as it's going to get? If you need other features will
your requests be answered with "Use a different language."  Could be.  More than
one person on this list has said "right tool for the job".

All that I'm throwing out here is that under the ILE construct CL may be the
wrench where a hammer is better suited for the job at hand.  Sure you can drive 
a
nail with a wrench.  (And those of you that do know who you are :)) And some may
get more out of the wrench then you or I have, but is it the "right tool for the
job"?  And beyond that, does it have portability?

Our company is not about to jump on the latest band wagon coming through town.
We still try to get the most out of the "main stream" languages for the 400. And
that means RPG and CL.  But the times they are a-changing.  (Cheeky, with
apologies :))  ILE can have as significant a change in design construct as 
moving
from single to multi-user applications. It's a new ball game out there.  And
maybe we need a new ball to play (and win) the game.

Now just to have a little fun and play devil's advocate.. imagine where we would
be if IBM, in melding the S/36 and S/38 to create the AS/400, had chosen OCL as
the predominate control language (without the S/36EE baggage).  Why, we would
have a run time language with pretty good string handling, substitution,
capabilities of calling commands and programs, lack of routines (they could be
called), recursion, local/global variables.

Regards,
James W. Kilgore
qappdsn@ibm.net



+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to "MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com".
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---