Re: dspf exit pgm/WebFacing api. IBM should release this API into the wild.

Steve,

Rather than dictating how IBM delivers a given function (IBM should release
this API into the wild) isn't it sufficient that IBM provides a mechanism,
for those interested in the function, to ask for it? For years and years IBM
has said:

"

Licensees of this program who wish to have information about it for the
purpose of enabling: (i) the exchange of information between independently
created programs and other programs (including this one) and (ii) the mutual
use of the information which has been exchanged, should contact:

IBM Corporation
Software Interoperability Coordinator, Department YBWA
3605 Highway 52 N
Rochester, MN 55901
U.S.A.

Such information may be available, subject to appropriate terms and
conditions, including in some cases, payment of a fee.
"

Just ask for it! (And in case you're wondering, the "program" referenced
above is the i operating system and this statement can be found, among other
places, in the Information Center at
http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/iseries/v5r4/index.jsp)

Jon is most likely correct in his guess that compatibility across releases
may be a concern. To formally publish in the Information Center an API
implies a level of support for upward compatibility that might hinder IBMs
ability to quickly turn around functional enhancements.

Note that I'm not saying one way or the other that such an API exists. If it
does exist it would undoubtedly be treated as confidential information, but
as Jon brought up my name I thought I should at least chime in :)

Bruce Vining (who, in a past career, was the Software Interoperability
Coordinator -- don't you just love that title? lol)
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 8:59 AM, Steve Richter <stephenrichter@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 11:26 AM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

That has been available to some extent for some time Steve - it is
generally referred to as the WebFacing API and is used by many
software vendors. For whatever reason IBM decided to restrict the use
of the API to ISVs who meet certain criteria and conditions. My best
guess is that IBM want the ability to change the underlying API in the
future and don't want it escaping "into the wild" because then they
would be hogtied. Bruce Vining might be able to shed some more light
on this.

an API which allowed an exit program to intercept all input/output to
a display file would be extremely useful for shops to have access to.
Heck, let your imagination run wild and extend that capability to all
files, programs and procedure calls that a program makes. The
hardware side of IBM does world class work. So we have all the
processing power we need to enable hooked code to run quickly.

Program hooks are useful for a few reasons. You can modify a program
without changing ( or even needing ) the source code. You can change
the behavior of a program or procedure in one application without
affecting what that same code does in other applications on the
system.

-Steve
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.