[Info-vax] Programming languages on VMS
Chris Scheers
chris at applied-synergy.com
Mon Jan 29 19:24:12 EST 2018
Jan-Erik Soderholm wrote:
> 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...
FWIW: I have a couple of Win10 laptops with VB6 and VC6 IDEs installed
and functional.
VB6 works without problems under Win10. VC6 has a couple of minor
issues, but is very usable.
Both still produce applications that run fine under Win10.
Note that I did not install Visual Studio. Just the VB6 and VC6 products.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Chris Scheers, Applied Synergy, Inc.
Voice: 817-237-3360 Internet: chris at applied-synergy.com
Fax: 817-237-3074
More information about the Info-vax
mailing list