RE: [MI400] Running interactive program on a batch type

["jt" <jt@xxxxxx>]

I'm not inclined towards options 1 or 3 (the latter being unethical, if not
illegal).



Joe Pluta knows I hold Him in the highest regards.

Meaning no disrespect, I've found His and other similar solutions to have
the drawback of requiring hand-tooling of the converted code, which requires
some no small amount of re-testing of the apps...  From what I've seen,
Joe's solution requires a LOT less of this, than other solutions.



But they also require re-training, to varying degrees, of the users of the
system.



I wonder if a "Batch-5250" framework could be coded that allowed 100%
compatibility...?  IOW, zero difference in the user-experience of the system
(and no necessity to re-test the underlying code).

I guess a lot of folks are wondering this also...;-D



But, (but not wishing to drag up that whole thread again), I believe the
bigger question is:  Can OS/400 survive without the profits that the
"Interactive Penalty" provides...?

If not, then the CFINT governor could just be changed to identify this batch
work AS interactive...

I wouldn't even hazard a guess as to whether IBM would elect to do that, of
course.


jt


| -----Original Message-----
| From: mi400-admin@midrange.com [mailto:mi400-admin@midrange.com]On
| Behalf Of Leif Svalgaard
| Sent: Friday, August 30, 2002 8:46 AM
| To: mi400@midrange.com
| Subject: Re: [MI400] Running interactive program on a batch type
|
|
| From: sas <sas@toto.co.id>
| > Since the Interactive processor is limited :(
| > Are there any posiblities how to run an interactive
| > program on a batch type?
|

|
| 2) preprocess all your sources and replace calls
| to workstation I/O (READ etc) with calls to your own
| programs that communicate with the user. There
| are commercially available products that will do
| it for you, e.g. http://www.plutabrothers.com