[Info-vax] DCL, was: Re: Microkernel

[Simon Clubley]

On 2012-08-14, Paul Sture <paul.nospam at sture.ch> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Aug 2012 08:34:24 -0700, FrankS wrote:
>
>> Providing examples of what you're doing on BASH doesn't quite cut it for
>> me, because we have ways of working around things on OpenVMS that might
>> not be available on Unix and its variants.
>> 

I was trying more to explain a general workflow which I use in bash and
would like to use in VMS. I explained the other things because you need
the tools to be able to access the command history (and construct new
commands) in a efficient way in order for my preferred workflow to be
viable.

However, I do have a direct like-for-like example which I had forgotten
about when I posted my response. I recently looked at the slrn (it's a
newsreader) and slang (required support library for slrn) source trees
on both VMS and Linux.

On VMS, I found it cumbersome to move around the source tree and find
things in the code, and at one point, knowing what was possible on Linux,
I actually said "sod this" and went and did my digging around on Linux.
On Linux, I found it quick and efficient to move around the source trees
and do the same things I was trying to do on VMS.

In this case, I was mainly missing directory/filename completion and
efficient recall of previous commands.

>> So I'm still unconvinced that the existing OpenVMS facilities need to be
>> augmented by a permanent command buffer, and all the associated
>> headaches related to consolidating those buffers across multiple
>> terminal sessions.
>
> At one time I would have agreed with you, but the more I am exposed to 
> other systems, the more useful I see such features.  Command line 
> completion is another feature I miss when I go back to VMS - it really is 
> useful.
>

Thinking about it, I think this is the core issue.

Sometimes when you look at other systems, you think "yuck, VMS is far
better at that", but other times you think "this is really nice and I
wish VMS could do this".

Quite a bit of what I am asking for can be done in a different way with
DCL, even if it's not as elegant as under bash. However, it's all the
little things in bash which come together as a whole and produce, for
me, a seamless workflow and it's really hard to describe the resultant
whole unless you have experienced it.

I think it's a case of not missing something you have never been
exposed to. (And, yes, I accept the workflow of other people will be
different from my own and hence they may not put as much emphasis on
these capabilities even if they were exposed to them.)

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Microsoft: Bringing you 1980s technology to a 21st century world