Re: TV Ad (I'm the man)

On Mon, 2005-10-17 at 20:54 -0400, Steve Richter wrote:
> I dont know, I think IBM has to improve the system before they try to
> sell people on the idea of buying it.
It has been working well since 1988 or so.  

>   I am doing a lot of programming
> of the system lately and it is not easy.
>  
No?  CRTBNDRPG command not working?


>   A large system, we are
> writing new programs, creating new files every day.  The 10 character
> object name is very cramped - too much time is spent working out what
> naming convention to use.    
We had this discussion once before already.  10 ^ 36 is a *lot* of
program names.


> Always trying to write reuseable, modular
> code, we are coding SQL procedures, ILE procedures, CL commands.
There is no such thing as a CL command.

>   The
> problem is ILE, SQL, CL and, of course, Java dont work seamlessly
> together.
Sure they do. ILE can call embedded (or even dynamic) sql.  CL programs
can call RPG just fine.  The syntax is 'CALL PGMNAME'  You can even pass
parms in and get results out.  It's been working for a looong time.

>  SQL procedures can call into ILE, but ILE cant call an SQL
> procedure.
I've got all kinds of RPG code that does 'Select * from file', all done
from RPG.  Are you saying you can't call a stored procedure from an ILE
RPG program via a 'Select' statement?  I haven't used any stored
procedures, but I find this hard to believe.

>   CL commands work with programs, but dont with ILE
> procedures.  
No such thing as a CL command.  You can have a command.  You can have a
CL program.  No such thing as a CL command AFAICT.

> Been experimenting with using CALLPRC in CLLE lately,
Don't bother.  It's much more appropriate to call procedures from RPG or
C than CL.  CL stands for control language.  I think of it as primarily
a way to marshal bits of a job around.  Anything intricate should be
done in RPG.

> just to take advantage of the self documenting of the long procedure
> name.  This is not working so well because of the lack of support in
> CL of RPG varying and data struct types.
Quit doing that.  It's not meant for that, at least in my opinion.
Especially if you need to support older machines that don't have such
features.

>  Would be great if IBM would
> put some investment into enhancing CL commands.  Allow them to be the
> interface and gateway to all these bastions of code on the system. 
> >From a CLLE module I should be able to call an SQL procedure, a Java
> static method, an ILE procedure and a program - all thru the a long
> name command interface.
Why do you believe this?  I think you are dead wrong.  I'm more of less
phasing CL out, in favor of RPG.  It's pretty easy to call commands and
other programs from RPG.

Tired of the FUD,
Rich