[Info-vax] DCL's flaws (both scripting and UI)

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

abrsvc skrev den 2015-01-21 19:12:
> Having worked on code that was a replacement for DCL, I would vote for
> an add-on environment that could be "called" from a shell DCL procedure.
> I agree with Hoff in that the file extention should be different as
> well.  Whether C64 (for 64bit DCL) or CMD for a "command" file is a good
> fit can be debated.  The bottom line here is that the process context
> and environment created by process creation with teh DCL cli should
> remain.  It should be easier that way.  Why recreate the wheel as far as
> process context is concerned.
>
> Thoughts?
>

Agree.
Let the process start up in DCL and let the programmer or
system manager, decide if and when to call an additional
tool to complement DCL.

I do not see any reason to change the COM file name just
becuse some of them are calling some other tool.

In fact, I always run all my Python scripts from a small
DCL file, that way it is easy to add setup for some
specific logicals or whatever before calling Python.

------------------------------------------
$! My little demo COM file running Python
$!
$ python
from VMS import queues
import <some other modules...>

do whatever needed in Python...

quit
$!
$ exit
------------------------------------------

Easy and from the "outside" still looks just as
any other COM file on the system.

Jan-Erik.