[Info-vax] DCL Syntax

[Dave Froble]

On 8/31/2018 2:25 PM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
> On 08/31/2018 02:04 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 8/31/2018 11:29 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>> On 08/31/2018 10:37 AM, Dave Froble wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Now, what about the old VMS management station software?  Actually, is
>>>> requiring a weendoze or other desktop for GUI management of VMS
>>>> systems all that bad of an idea?
>>>
>>> I am sure there are many here who would say yes, especially if it
>>> required Windows.  :-)
>>>
>>>>                           Not a major cost for the desktop.  I think
>>>> the problem would be insuring that the interface to the desktop, the
>>>> desktop part of the system, would always be the same as the command
>>>> line based management.  Might be a whole bunch cheaper and easier than
>>>> graphics on a VMS system.
>>>>
>>>
>>> And who is going to write and maintain this non-VMS software needed
>>> to administer VMS systems?  How do you decide which other OSes that
>>> offer desktops your going to support?  Or are you happy alienating
>>> some of the customer base?
>>>
>>> bill
>>>
>>
>> I'd guess the same people doing the rest of VMS development.  Now
>> let's see, who might that be?  Possibly VSI?
>
> I wasn't aware that VSI was hiring Windows and Unix graphics savvy
> programmers.

It's my understanding that some of the early porting work was done on 
weendoze.

>> As for some of the customer base, would you rather have them all upset
>> without a GUI management capability?  Or just Philip and perhaps Brian?
>
> No, I think the future requires it.  Even though lots of us (even some
> of us Unix weenies) prefer the command line the future, like it or not,
> is screaming for GUI.  The question really is where that GUI is going
> to sit.  I am still in favor of it residing on VMS.  That does not
> necessarily mean graphics support on the VMS box itself, although I am
> also in favor of that, but the applications need to run on VMS and only
> have the ability to display elsewhere as well as on the VMS host if it
> ends out supporting graphics hardware.

Of course the data will reside on the VMS system.  But communications 
between VMS and weendoze is quite simple.  I do it all the time.

I could most likely do it all in VB6.

The VMS system would contain the data, and when the GUI management 
station asks for the current data, it gets passed, presented in a GUI 
application, perhaps modified according to some rules, and passed back 
to the VMS system for posting the modifications.  The key would be the 
app on weendoze knowing what it is working with, and what it's allowed 
to do.  Perhaps even being overruled by the VMS system.

It would not be trivial, nor would it be all that hard.