Re: Request for CL, DDS, SQL RPG enhancements

Hello Buck,

You wrote:
>I've used ReXX for recent scripting needs and it's very elegant, but
>that doesn't help my several thousand CL programs written in the /38
>days alas.

Which are already doing the job well.  I'm not suggesting that you
rewrite all your CL in Rexx but if you need to make major structural
changes to a CL program then Rexx becomes a candidate.

>There is always the problem of time and money in any development
>organisation.  Perhaps IBM will see there's demand for script language
>enhancements and allocate additional funding in that area (instead of
>pilfering the RPG compiler funds or, God forbid, from the SQL
>precompiler funds!)

That's true.  But given how profitable the AS/400 is to IBM (the company)
I can't help wondering how much of that profit actually makes its way
back to Rochester to fund further development and how much gets diverted
to consolidated funds and spent on stuff AS/400 users have little
interest in?  I'm not complaining about funds diverted to IBM Research
because one never knows where research dollars will pay off, but since CL
is part of OS/400 and OS/400 is on every system it is reasonable to
suppose that OS/400 is profitable (even if it is considered part of
hardware revenue) and that the bulk of that money should go back to
Rochester for further improvements.

>A very thought provoking thread.  I wonder what would *I* do if I held
>the purse strings?  What audience would I try to satisfy best?

That is a difficult choice.  A balance must be struck between enhancing
the existing software and creating completely new stuff.  In many cases
it seems to me that the balance has been shifted to the new stuff at the
expense of enhancements.  In the process things have become much more
complex -- needlessly so in my view.  For example, WebSphere is overly
complex mostly because the developers are Unix weenies who don't know any
better (dozens of directories, deep nesting, a dozen configuration files
in different directories, log files all over the place, pah!).  Their
solution to the complexity is to create a pretty windows GUI to manage
the configuration thus adding yet another layer of complexity for little
benefit.

The cynical among us would suggest the complexity is deliberate in order
to create service or educational opportunities, but cynical as I am, I
don't actually believe that.  I think it simply doesn't occur to the
developers to do it any other way.  The services and education revenue
appeals to the managers so they have no reason to instigate changes.

Regards,
Simon Coulter.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
   FlyByNight Software         AS/400 Technical Specialists
   http://www.flybynight.com.au/

   Phone: +61 3 9419 0175   Mobile: +61 0411 091 400        /"\
   Fax:   +61 3 9419 0175   mailto: shc@flybynight.com.au   \ /
                                                             X
                 ASCII Ribbon campaign against HTML E-Mail  / \
--------------------------------------------------------------------