[Info-vax] HP wins Oracle Itanium case

[Bob Koehler]

In article <k18f4q$7jh$1 at Iltempo.Update.UU.SE>, Johnny Billquist <bqt at softjar.se> writes:
> 
> That is just because you are using some HLL which have built in support 
> to call RMS with keywords that map to RMS functionality... :-)

   Nope.  I use RMS every time I code in an HLL on VMS, without any
   mention of, or special keywords referencing RMS.

   For some of the HLL, there are some ectended capabilities, but I
   don't have to use them in my code to be using RMS.
 
> RMS have some good and tight integration with the languages in VMS, but 
> that doesn't mean it plays on the same level as any other database... ;-)

   Don't know anyone claiming that it did.
 
> But nowadays everyone like to use C, or something similar in taste, in 
> which all invocations of anything means doing function calls.
> I bet you even need function calls to do anything with RMS from C (you 
> do on a PDP-11 atleast...)

   I would be very suprized if fprintf on RSX-11M/M+ wasn't implemented
   on top of RMS or FCS.

   All the function calls I need to do RMS from C on a VMS system are
   the ASCII standard C library calls.  And no, I don't have to use
   the DEC extenstions that provide additional arguments.