Re: Is this really new ?

>I think it would be neat to have access at run time to ILE's resolving of
the procedures being called.

We have that now with library lists. Could you expound more on what you
are looking for outside of what library lists provide?

>The only way we get the improvements ( and enthusiasm ) needed to make
the system competitive is if it is open sourced.

Oh, is that why Microsoft proprietary closed-source products work so well
together and are the best selling development environment ever to exist in
the history of computing (I have no stats to prove this, but I would think
it is a fair guess). Proprietary software done right can be leaps and
bounds ahead of anything open source or open spec. Do I like open source
stuff? Yes. But it is not a black and white subject. The gray areas are
realizing what can be accomplished with closed-source and proprietary
systems (like OS400+DB2+RPG).

Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com

Steve Richter wrote:

On Wed, Jan 28, 2009 at 8:14 AM, Aaron Bartell <aaronbartell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I believe you do a lot of .NET (correct me if I am wrong) and being that
you rail on signature violations so much I would love to hear how they
could be made better (I have my own ideas, but believe they are
different from yours). IMO they do serve a purpose and if you do your
builds and binder language correctly they you should really only ever
get signature errors when it is important to get one (i.e. like when a
program that should have been recompiled wasn't).


I think it would be neat to have access at run time to ILE's
resolving of the procedures being called. We have much more CPW now
than when ILE was designed. Procedure overrides and run time
resolution by name can be done without a performance hit.

But it does not matter. IBM is no longer in the language, OS and
runtime business. The only way we get the improvements ( and
enthusiasm ) needed to make the system competitive is if it is open
sourced.