[Info-vax] BASIC compiler in the hobbyist distribution

[David Froble]

Stephen Hoffman wrote:


>>
>> VAX / DEC Basic still allows, as far as I know, chaining to a line 
>> number in a program.
> 
> A more recent analog to that is an RPC, and there are various options 
> available.  OpenVMS even has one or two of these available.
> 
> If you're depending on invoking some code by line number as a form of 
> security and given the "attacker" is already at the command line and 
> able to test commands, well, that's not a very robust defense.  Now if 
> those line numbers were image-activation-specific cryptographic random 
> numbers and the address space was randomly shuffled around, that might 
> be a bit better.

Invoking programs with multiple entry points allowed some initialization 
to be done, allowing the program to run with different start-up parameters.

Back in the day security just wasn't much of an issue.

>>> Yes, I would like to see the BASIC interpreter added back into the
>>> product. It was nice. Whenever you had a tricky piece of code to work
>>> on which was part of a much larger application, you could open up the
>>> interpreter and kick around 50 to a few hundred lines of code until
>>> the thing worked. THEN you put it in your real module.
>>
>> Or, you could use the debugger ....
>>
>> Yeah, both can be helpful.
> 
> These have evolving into IDEs, and what Xcode calls a "playground" is 
> something to look at, in this context.  Or continuous compilation, as 
> that lets you test your code right in the editor and invoke and debug 
> it, without having to exit your editing session and explicitly compile 
> and link and debug.    Again, a good IDE is really handy here.

So, where do I find the IDEs that work with VAX/DEC Basic?

>>> DCL needs to remain DCL.
>>
>> I'm happy with DCL.
> 
> You're happy because you haven't found something better.    But then 
> there's no reasonable way to kill DCL either, so it'll be around as long 
> as OpenVMS.

I'm happy because by and large it does what I need it to do.  Nor do I 
attempt to use it for things that it's not suited for.

>>> If they, whoever 'they' are, wish to add another shell language, they
>>> need to roll from scratch based on the current ANSI standard a REXX
>>> interpreter + compiler. VMS needs to once again target the mainframe
>>> customers instead of trying to swim in the bottom of the sewer with
>>> the x86 crowd.
> 
> Rexx?   Can't say that reaching back to the 1970s and to IBM mainframes 
> was something I'd particularly considered.  No UTF-8 support, and adding 
> that can be involved.   But if you do want Rexx, NetRexx apparently 
> compiles and runs on the JVM.
> 
> As for the planned x86-64 release of OpenVMS, how is your port off of 
> OpenVMS going, seasoned_geek?  Gonna keep those Itanium and older boxes 
> going for a while, while porting the applications off of the OpenVMS 
> platform?

Indeed!  This is the real and only issue.  Customers won't pay for 
expensive HW, and even if a few would, they are not enough justify a 
vendor to serve them.

Frankly, I don't see where geek's argument is coming from.  HW is HW, it 
does what it's told to do.  Unless I'm entirely clueless (as some have 
claimed) I don't see where x86 (other than being a poorly implemented 
but very well developed CPU) is any different from others.

>> VMS can be used by all types of customers.  As a computer.  Not so 
>> much as a user interface.
> 
> As a back-office server, yes, OpenVMS can work for some folks and 
> particularly for folks with existing OpenVMS applications.    One 
> challenge for VSI involves trying to grow beyond that base.

Sometimes JOAT is good.  At other times maybe not.  Is it ordained that 
VMS must grow beyond what it does well now?  I'm not so sure.  Sometimes 
people need a good back office (your term, not mine) server that does 
it's job well.

I don't believe that the decline of VMS had anything to do with it's 
capabilities.  Instead try DEC's embrace of Unix and weendoze, Compaq's 
lack of resolve, and HP's neglect.  Then there was dropping Alpha, and 
selecting the itanic.  A long string of bad decisions.  Can any 
customers be blamed for thinking the ship was sinking, and seeking 
lifeboats?

I think that VMS could do well if it gets updates that have been 
neglected, insures the best security available, and shouts it to the 
world.  More and more people are being affected by security problems. 
Give them a better mousetrap, AND let them know it exists, and perhaps 
that might bring in new customers.