Re: "IBM i Modernization" & PASE

I've been catching up on some of the points made about the java native
interface, etc. I admit that IBM has provided interfaces which help
integrate PASE and IBM i, and PASE hosted language environments with the
IBM i integrated language environment.

I'm pleased that IBM i and PASE are integrated. I'm pleased that IBM is
supporting popular language environments in PASE. I've written ILE programs
which call Java methods. I appreciate that Java is a supported platform. I
don't want anyone misinterpreting my views as being anti-PASE or anti-PASE
language environments.

On the other hand, I view IBM i as a platform, Java as a platform, PASE as
a platform, and all the interpreted language environments which are hosted
on PASE to be platforms. They are all virtual machine environments in their
own right.

I'm mostly saying that platforms are containers which have fairly well
defined boundaries. And I think it makes sense to recognize and acknowledge
the boundaries when you see them.

At the CPU level, IBM has indicated that Power chips supports 32-bit and
64-bit "PC mode", and 64-bit "Amazon" mode. The majority of Unix
applications in the world are 32-bit applications in contrast to IBM i,
which runs in the 64-bit Amazon mode. I just note the boundary.

Single-level store is a boundary. The technology independent machine
interface is a boundary. Frank Soltis makes a point that future hardware
changes may force a rewrite of Unix applications, for example.

In regards to the CPU switching between 64-bit Amazon and 32-bit PC modes,
that sounds a lot like the role of a hypervisor. Frank Soltis indicated
that the hypervisor was a requirement for running IBM i and AIX together on
Power; PASE is a subset of AIX.