What this COBOL programmer likes (and doesn't)

I've only been a programmer for about 2 years and I've only been using WDSCi
for about 4 months. Programmers with more experience using COBOL or WDSCi
may have different opinions than I do.

Here's what I like:

1. I like the price. WDSCi requires no additional licensing fees. If this
were not so, I probably would
    not have been given the opportunity my managers to evaluate it. 

2.  I like coding with WDSCi because of the: 

        a. LPEX Editor.  The LPEX editor uses language sensitive
color-coding of source 
                code instead of the solid green color of source code in SEU.
The LPEX editor
                is easily resized to show more source code than can be shown
in the SEU 
                    editor.  The LPEX editor allows line by line scrolling
instead of half-page  
                    scrolling in the SEU editor. The LPEX editor can use
both SEU editing codes 
                    (e.g., D, DD, C, CC, M, MM, I) and common text editing
functions (e.g., Cut, 
                    Copy, Paste, Delete, Select). The LPEX editor allows
customization of key 
                    actions.  

        b. Outline View. The Outline View is essentially a navigation tree
for program 
                structure. You can navigate program structure like you
navigate directory 
                structure using Microsoft Explore.  For example, click on
COBOL procedure 
                section 3200 in the Outline, and the LPEX editor is
positioned to section 3200. 

        c. Compilation Messages. Messages from compiles appear below the
source code. 
                This lets me view the compilation messages and the source
code at the same time. 
                I can click on a compilation error message and I am
positioned in the LPEX editor 
                to the offending line of source code.

d. Offline Editing. I can download source to my PC or laptop and modify it
offline.
    I can later push the modified code back to the iSeries.
        
        e. Preferences. I can customize workspaces, perspectives, views, and
tools to 
               satisfy my needs and preferences. 

3. I like the WDSCi interface development tools.

        a. Code Designer. Although Code Designer is not technically part of
WDSCi, it 
                comes bundled with WDSCi and is easily launched from WDSCi.
I think this
                tool is superior to SDA.

        b. Webfacing Tool. The Webfacing tool lets me rapidly develop Web
interfaces 
                for COBOL applications with few or no changes to source
code. No Web 
                development skills are necessary, though my HTML and CSS
skills allow me
                to make more advanced customizations of the Web interfaces.


Here's what I don't like:

1. Performance can be annoyingly slow on some occasions. I'm use a 1GHz CPU
with 
    500 MB RAM, so WDSCi performance is annoyingly slow on some occasions.
The 
    annoyances mostly occur during start-up and during object resolution
when bringing
    an object down from the iSeries. I still find myself using Access for
Windows to do 
    quick and easy tasks, or investigative tasks where I may want to browse
or switch 
    quickly between many source members.  However, to be fair, I get along
pretty good
    most of the time, and things may get better as I grow more accustomed to
WDSCi.
    More RAM might also help. 

2. I don't think debugging is friendly. I still open a session of Access for
Windows and use 
    ISDB to debug COBOL OPM programs.  There may be some advantages to
debugging in 
    WDSCi compared to ISDB, but I haven't found the process of getting
started with WDSCi 
    debugging to be intuitive.  Make it simpler and I'd probably switch.

3. I still need Access for Windows for some tools. Although some vendors are
starting to offer plug-ins
    for development tools I use often (e.g., DBU), other development tools
(e.g., Hawkeye) do not yet
    have plug-ins.  I still use Access for Windows for some tools. Of
course, this will probably lessen 
    as WDSCi becomes more widely used. 

Hope this helps.
Thanks,
Kelly