[Info-vax] 64 bit DCL ?

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

"VAXman- "@SendSpamHere.ORG skrev den 2015-01-18 15:50:
> In article <92930a0e-9e71-4715-9528-85f74a2094af at googlegroups.com>, dodecahedron99 at gmail.com writes:
>> Sorry if this goes against the grain of those that love DCL but wouldn't it=
>> be better to let DCL die a natural death?
>>
>> If it's time and effort being expended on 'OpenVMS Next', then I don't beli=
>> eve it's DCL that should get the attention
>>
>> As much as DCL has brought OpenVMS along, it's time has well and truly come=
>> and gone as a modern glue script for OpenVMS
>>
>> My vote would be to spend the time and effort into Python.=20
>>
>> A lot of the work has already been done getting python running on OpenVMS a=
>> nd I believe getting Python 3 onto OpenVMS is also underway. Having somethi=
>> ng like Python 3 as it's native CLI I think would have spin-offs longer las=
>> ting than investing more time into DCL
>>
>> Powershell looks nice as it has built-in's for direct web output creation b=
>> ut Python can do similar through libraries and Python over time keeps incor=
>> porating more and more useful aspects into it's core
>>
>> Here's a rough comparison between the uptake of Python versus Powershell. Y=
>> es, I hate these types of comparisons as well but it gives an brief snapsho=
>> t
>>
>> http://www.techwars.io/fight/python/powershell/
>>
>> My fear of introducing 64bit DCL into the current DCL image is:
>>
>> 1. It will break something
>> 2. It is time and effort into a scripting language that is dead and too lim=
>> ited to take OpenVMS into the future, IMO
>> 3. It will not help promote the move on from DCL, just prolong it's entrenc=
>> hment in OpenVMS
>>
>> I'd rather see a clean cut so as to leave existing DCL as it is and invest =
>> time and effort into a universally accepted language that would also help t=
>> he port of further code onto OpenVMS going forward
>>
>> Then there is the topic of fostering rapid development on OpenVMS. Librarie=
>> s libraries libraries are needed. At present there is simply too much old o=
>> utdated libraries around and very little from an OO nature, even the C++ im=
>> plementation left a lot to be desired. If Python is supported fully and dev=
>> eloped on OpenVMS natively, then porting other libraries should be easier
>>
>> I know it will be a lot of work to hammer out a full set of Python librarie=
>> s for OpenVMS that could replace and go beyond DCL but IMO we don't want to=
>> just replace DCL, we want to better it and have a native language that can=
>> take us forward.=20
>> Yes, Python lacks on the web side but I think it has more going for it than=
>> Powershell, as good as Powershell is. Python is OO based as well (PowerShe=
>> ll is too but not as fully implemented).=20
>>
>> Having an OO based language as it's CLI should overtime help foster more ro=
>> bust scripts and more importantly, more script re-use and could foster the =
>> use of Python modules specific to OpenVMS. Imagine OpenVMS being filled wit=
>> h libraries that were not just examples to be cut and paste into your scrip=
>> ts but actual callable routines that were part of the OS itself that could =
>> be simply called :-). This is what gave lexicals their edge IMO, simple to =
>> use and call and could be called straight from the CLI. They were good enou=
>> gh for most things and that's the key
>>
>> Scripting languages have become prominent because they are now good enough,=
>> same as why Linux and it's derivatives are seen as good enough when compar=
>> ed to OpenVMS. We need to not just play catchup with bringing OpenVMS into =
>> the modern world but to leapfrog ahead and IMO, that doesn't involve keepin=
>> g DCL as OpenVMS's CLI
>>
>> We need to look beyond existing OpenVMS users (myself included) and their c=
>> omfort levels but look to what will attract new people to OpenVMS. It's not=
>> going to be 64 bit DCL. People these days are not willing to invest time a=
>> nd effort into learning just another language unless they see it has longev=
>> ity and possibility a job at the end of it. I've seen this trend in people =
>> asking on forums about whether or not they should learn language X or Y. So=
>> rry, but DCL isn't going to get a look in.=20
>>
>> Python might go someways to attracting people willing to port libraries and=
>> code to OpenVMS but DCL no matter how enhanced will not (unless it's porte=
>> d to other OS's and the chances of that happening are less than zero!)
>>
>> OpenVMS needs to move away from being so different to Linux while keeping a=
>> nd enhancing what makes it awesome. Moving to a cross-platform scripting la=
>> nguage like Python should go some way (maybe a long way) to helping with th=
>> at task
>>
>> My 2c worth
>
> Fuck that.  If you want Linux, get linux.
>
> Python?  Gack!  Unnecessary Ubersuperbloatwarez for the task(s) that DCL
> should be used to solve.
>
> DCL is perfect for what it does and what it should be used for.  Trying to
> write programs, any programs, that would be better served by writing them
> in any compiled language using DCL is, IMNSHO, stupid.  Besides, you can't
> execute a command in Python such as "$ SHOW PROCESS" without going through
> hurdles because that command (or any for that matter) is issued via a sub-
> process.
>

Now, if you actualy *want* to do that, use SHOW PROCESS from DCL.

If you on the other hand want to read and process process inforamtion,
you can use the F$GET... (for further processing options) the similar
calls in the Python port (that does not, of course, use subprocesses...).

Jan-Erik.