[Info-vax] Programming languages on VMS

[Jan-Erik Soderholm]

Den 2018-01-29 kl. 17:20, skrev DaveFroble:
> Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>> Den 2018-01-29 kl. 00:49, skrev DaveFroble:
>>> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>> On 01/27/2018 04:57 AM, Henry Crun wrote:
>>>>> On 27-Jan-2018 11:42, Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
>>>>>> Den 2018-01-27 kl. 04:02, skrev Bill Gunshannon:
>>>>>>> On 01/26/2018 06:06 PM, DaveFroble wrote:
>>>>>>>> Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 01/26/2018 03:36 PM, Johnny Billquist wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2018-01-24 18:26, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> Given what it was designed for BASIC was never taken seriously. 
>>>>>>>>>>> Even
>>>>>>>>>>> after ANSIfication it was still not overly practical as most 
>>>>>>>>>>> versions
>>>>>>>>>>> were interpreted and not compiled. What data type of 
>>>>>>>>>>> none-integer does
>>>>>>>>>>> BASIC support that can do calculations with decimals without the
>>>>>>>>>>> cumulative error common to floating point?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is that a trick question?
>>>>>>>>>> BASIC can actually do arithmetic on strings, with arbitrary 
>>>>>>>>>> precision.
>>>>>>>>>> And that's been in several different BASIC dialects I've played 
>>>>>>>>>> with.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> But the problem with BASIC is every one is different.  Not the kind
>>>>>>>>> of language I would be betting my business on today.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>  From the BP2 help:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>    FUNCTIONS
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>      BUILT-IN
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>        SUM$
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>   The SUM$ function returns a string whose value is the sum of 
>>>>>>>>>> two numeric
>>>>>>>>>>   strings.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>   Format
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>       str-vbl = SUM$(str-exp1, str-exp2)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>   Example
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>   600    Sigma$ = SUM$("234.444", A$)
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You also have DIF$, PROD$ and QUO$.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Totally unique to DEC.  Later RSTS, RSX and then VMS.  I have
>>>>>>>>> worked with a number of versions of BASIC and no others did it.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Considering that VMS BASIC has the DECIMAL type makes one wonder
>>>>>>>>> why they keep STRING Arithmetic.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> bill
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> bill
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Once it's in there, it may be more trouble to rip it out, and then 
>>>>>>>> there are possible customers using the capability.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Guess that depends on why they added an equivalent feature.  If it
>>>>>>> was to become standard compliant than after a suitable time when the
>>>>>>> old way was marked "deprecated" it should go away.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So what if it's DEC specific.  Many DEC specific things were / are 
>>>>>>>> better than anything else available.  Why would anyone want to 
>>>>>>>> choose lowest common denominator when there is better available. 
>>>>>>>> Your argument makes no sense, unless you expect the DEC stuff to go 
>>>>>>>> away, which, was an issue for a while.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don;t expect the DEC stuff to go away.  I merely pointed out that
>>>>>>> the biggest problem with BASIC is that no two are the same.  It isn't
>>>>>>> least common denominator.  It's what is in the standard.  There is a
>>>>>>> reason people go to so  much trouble to make standards.  Too bad so
>>>>>>> few people end out following them.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you choose your cars based upon conformity to a Yugo?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yugo was never a standard.  Well, maybe a standard for poor
>>>>>>> quality.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Do you do ANYTHING based upon conformity to "lowest common 
>>>>>>>> denominator"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Probably not, but the standard is not "lowest common denominator".
>>>>>>> Or, maybe they are and we should just stop writing standards.  How
>>>>>>> do you think the automotive industry would be without SAE?  (Or DIN
>>>>>>> in Germany!) Cars was your example....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> bill
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Yes, some/most standards are a good thing. Just think how it would
>>>>>> be if not everyone used a metric measuring system! What a mess...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Its been said before, specifically about DEC BASIC: If it had not been 
>>>>> called BASIC, but say DEC Business Oriented Language, all this 
>>>>> comparison with different varieties of BASIC would be moot.
>>>>
>>>> I have long said this.  When you change a language you should change
>>>> the name and not expect the language to morph to your desires.  I
>>>> still consider K&R to be C.  And  not just because of my penchant for
>>>> older systems.
>>>>
>>>>>  From my experience working with BP2 on a financial system with 
>>>>> several thousand modules, transferred fairly painlessly from PDP 11-70 
>>>>> RSTS to early (circa V5.5) VMS on VAX and then to Alpha where as far 
>>>>> as I know it is still extant.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I have no doubt, but what if you had to move it to an IBM 4331?  Or a
>>>> Univac-1100? (Both of the same point in time.)  Both had BASIC but not
>>>> the same language as DEC.  Thus a good reason to use standard languages
>>>> rather than languages so full of "extensions" they hardly represent
>>>> the language they claim to be.
>>>>
>>>> bill
>>>
>>> If it weren't for what DEC made the language, it probably wouldn't be 
>>> worth using.
>>>
>>> I don't HAVE to move software to an IBM, or anything else.  I'm happy 
>>> with VMS.
>>>
>>> If someone does desire such a move, they are going to pay, dearly.  I 
>>> had a customer that for some reason wanted to move away from VMS, and to 
>>> weendoze. Note that this was to most reliable system they had.  I gave 
>>> them a quote which I figured would put a stop to such ideas. They're 
>>> desire was so strong that they came up with the money.  And so I totally 
>>> re-wrote the software using VB6. Any sort of port was nonsense.  I of 
>>> course used the original for reference. And I cashed the check.
>>>
>>
>> And what happened to the VB6 app? Still in use? The maintenance situation
>> for VB6 is quite bad today...
> 
> Don't know, we went our separate ways.  Knowing the people involved, it 
> most likely is still in use.
> 
> Not sure what you mean by "maintenance situation".

Well, you replied yourself to that. :-)

Hard to use under Win10 (and maybe Win7, don't know).
And as you say, not too easy to port to VB.Net.

I have (on my Win10 laptop) an Oracle VirtualBox installation
where I have installed Win-XP and the developmet environment for
VB6. This is used now for supporting a couple VB6 applications.

> VB6 still does today what it did in the past.

Of course. FWIW.

> Out of support from Microsoft, as far as I know.  
> I haven't been able to install it on a weendoze 7 system, or later.  I have 
> seen information on how to do so.

Yes, I have seen a number of work-arounds to get the VB6 IDE to
run on Win10, but never tried that since I did have both a WinXP
CD and a VB6 CD available. And VirtualBox is free anyway.

> And since this thread has discussed portability, all I'll say about that is 
> don't try to port VB6 code to VB.net.  You will be VERY unhappy.  VB isn't 
> portable on weendoze.

Depends on once definition of "portable" I guess. But yes, you do need
to rewrite parts of the application, and sometimes change it to a
larger degree...

> Perhaps Steve should consider such a disgusting software vendor...

VB6 (and the whole VB suite has been highly successfull and many
fine applications has been built using it. The software at it's
time was a realy nice tool.

If I'm not wrong, *that* vendor is at least still in business...