RE: CODE/400 -- MIDRANGE-L

//--- forwarded letter -------------------------------------------------------
> Date: Tue, 03 Mar 98 11:40:16 -0500
> From: "Buck Calabro" <mcalabro@commsoft.net>
> To: "'Midrange-l@midrange.com'" <Midrange-l@midrange.com>
> Reply-To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
> Subject: RE: CODE/400

Hello Buck,
You wrote:

> My first employer refused to spend that dollar for a PC based editor, so when 
>Flex/Edit
> came out, I bought a copy for myself.  We had 3 AS/400's and a S/36.  It was 
>a hassle
> doing work on the "remote" 400's because I had to SNADS the source to my 
>local 400
> before Flex could use PC Support to bring it to my PC.  Once I had it on my 
>PC, I had
> to use SEU on the remote 400 to put a note in the source that I was working 
>on it, so
> that no other programmer would tinker it while I had it on my PC.  I only 
>used Flex/Edit
> for major development, because when it came time to test/debug, I had to keep 
>the source
> on the remote machine because it would not compile on the local one.  
> 
> Despite these conditions, I used it until I changed jobs.  I used it because 
>I tend to
> write fairly modular code, and Flex/Edit offered me the ability to work in 
>"outline"
> mode: expand the subroutine you're working on, while viewing a compact version
> showing me the references.  Having an on-line field usage was extremely 
>valuable
> as was undo/redo.  By far, the best feature, the one that made me shell out 
>my own
> money was the search/replace capability.  Being able to grep my current 
>project's
> program/file/display file members and replace field names, find subroutines, 
>etc.
> was a godsend.  That allowed me to "go back" and clean up older code with the
> confidence that I hadn't missed something through manual scan/replace cycles.
> 
> Why did I stop using it?  When I changed jobs, I went to work for a firm 
>where 
> there are 60+ remote AS/400's.  All the source code is out there; none of it 
>here.
> The mechanical issues of fetching, "pseudo-locking" and replacing the source
> are too error prone.  Some of these clients are connected via TCP/IP, some are
> dial-up.  No PC editor deals well with that environment.  Because I changed
> jobs, I have not kept up with the upgrades; I recently downloaded a demo copy
> from the web; it's still as good as I remember it being.


Sounds like Flex/Edit was an incomplete environment.  Useful but to awkward to 
keep using it.  
CODE/400 was around before Flex/Edit and it was complete so why didn't you use 
that -- oh 
silly me it only ran on OS/2 and popular opinion said that was a dead operating 
system (notice 
they're still saying that 4 or 5 years later).  CODE/400 could have been the 
tool ("killer 
application"?) that brought AS/400 shops to OS/2 but no, those shops are too 
conservative to 
try such a novel idea (who else has done this? we don't want to be the first!). 
 Now, of 
course IBM's AS/400 developers are lending credence to that idea by not 
provided proper OS/2 
support for ClientAccess, etc.

If you'd bought CODE/400 and OS/2 to use as a developers environment you 
wouldn't have the 
mechanical issues.  CODE/400 would handle them.  Oh, TCP and DialUp issues.  
AnyNet would have 
helped with the first problem, you'd probably have been stuck with the old 
tools for DialUp.

So there are some environments where a PC development tool may not help.  Use 
the host tools 
in that situation and use the better tools when you can.  

> 
> This is OK as long as the tool vendor doesn't require a license for each of 
>the 60+ 
> AS/400's you need to work on.  A PC based editor works pretty well in this 
>circumstance,
> because the license is for the PC, not the 400.
> 
> Buck Calabro
> 

If a shop is doing development work on the AS/400 they will have a compiler and 
ADTS 
(otherwise how can they expect you to work?) therefore they will have the host 
component.  You 
just need to buy the client component.  That's the part I say should be 
purchased by those who 
want it -- consultants, contractors, and MIS staff.

Maybe IBM need to change their process so you can buy and install the client 
components 
without requiring a host AS/400.  From some of Jon's posts I believe this is 
being considered.  
I liked the idea of an entry version and optional purchase of the other 
components.

Perhaps we need to generate support for CODE/400 by buying and using it 
ourselves because it 
helps us do our jobs better.  For example, at one company I worked for 8 years 
ago I had to 
support every computer they had (System/38, ICL System25, Unix, PCs running 
CP/M, DOS, 
Windows, Novell, even OS/2) -- if it had a processor in it, it landed on my 
desk.  I found 
Norton's Utilities to be invaluable in my job.  I tried to get management to 
buy a copy, they 
wouldn't so I did, and I made a point of telling them every time I did 
something with it that 
I would not have been able to do otherwise (or just did it faster) until they 
decided to 
reimburse me for my expense.  

Regards,
Simon Coulter.

//----------------------------------------------------------
// FlyByNight Software         AS/400 Technical Specialists
// Phone: +61 3 9419 0175      Mobile: +61 3 0411 091 400
// Fax:   +61 3 9419 0175      E-mail: shc@flybynight.com.au
// 
// Windoze should not be open at Warp speed.
 

+---
| 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
+---