[Info-vax] Free Pascal for VMS ?

[Dave Froble]

On 5/21/2018 9:23 AM, seasoned_geek wrote:
> On Wednesday, May 16, 2018 at 2:50:23 PM UTC-5, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 5/12/2018 4:30 PM, seasoned_geek wrote:
>>
>>> So, I will ask you Hoff. What is the target market segment of OpenVMS on x86?
>>
>> I do believe that I've already answered this.  That you choose to ignore
>> that answer has very little affect on it's validity.
>>
>> To repeat myself, "to provide a platform to run VAX/DEC/Compaq/HP/VSI
>> Basic".
>
> You know Dave, I've got a pimp contacting me about what was a "support it until the contracts expire" project for a system written with a mix of ADA and other languages on VMS.
>
> They believed the exact same thing you did, only using the language ADA.
>
> Last I heard this is now becoming a "purge all things HP from every division of the company" project because ADA was taken out to the woods and shot.
>
> If you don't have it in writing that VAX BASIC is in the first wave, I wouldn't be betting on it.

While maybe not in the exact language you're looking for, and I'm too 
lazy to go find the post, but Clair wrote that Basic would always be 
offered on VMS.  I'm betting on it.  I do believe John may have 
mentioned something about it.  That good enough for you?

>>> What is the selling point for OpenVMS on x86?
>>
>> Another easy answer.  To provide the environment on hardware that can
>> actually be purchased, now and in the future.
>
> Well, now. Not in the future. The x86 is going the way of Zilog and CPM and going that way faster.

It will certainly outlive the itanic.  That's "in the future".

>>> The TCP/IP Software appliance is the one selling point which could
>>> push VMS back into data centers. Breaches are happening constantly.
>>> Even TLS isn't secure anymore. Every existing low end platform has a
>>> roll-your-own approach to network security where each and every new
>>> APP is a shiny new batch of threats just waiting to be exploited.
>>>
>>> Placing ALL network communication inside of a fleshed out TCP/IP
>>> Software Appliance (what we currently have one arm and 3 fingers from
>>> another of now) allowing transport layer security to be changed at
>>> will, perhaps even dynamically between message packets, is something
>>> you have to go waaaay up the IT food chain to get. *nix don't have
>>> it. Windows don't have it. Apple don't have it. IBM and Unisys
>>> marketing lit makes claims about something similar, but I haven't
>>> seen it.
>>>
>>
>> Now, thisd is one concept that I can in general agree with.
>
> Thank you.
>
> It is the _only_ selling point for VMS, but VMS didn't finish it.

I don't know how such might be done, but, if you want to talk to most of 
the world, it's via TCP/IP.