RE: AS/400

At 8:58 AM -0500 7/29/01, Joe Pluta wrote:
>I'm confused.  I've just explained how you can completely avoid the
>interactive tax while at the same time making your applications powerful and
>flexible, yet you're still using that old, out-of-date "governor" argument
>as your decision to move to a less reliable, less secure alternative.  It
>seems like you're dead set on moving regardless of what solution you get, so
>why pretend like you want an answer that include the iSeries?

    Perhaps.  But your method seems more like telling the driver of 
his hypothetical car that he *can* go 150 MPH if he needs to.  All he 
has to do is sit in the seat upside-down, work the gas and brake with 
his hands and steer with his feet.  Oh, and drill a hole in the 
floorboard so he can see where he is going.

    Why bother?   What's the advantage of changing tons of code by 
applying a technique, probably at great cost, whose design is 
unusable on any other platform and is not the standard even on its 
own platform?

    And finally, what's to stop IBM from making a change in the next 
release of CFINT to close the performance loophole exploited by this 
technique?  As long as CFINT exists in its present form, the 
"governor argument" is not out of date, but a real factor.

    Regards,

    - Lou Forlini
      Software Engineer
      System Support Products, Inc.
+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@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
+---