[Info-vax] OpenVMS Development Annoyances

[Dave Froble]

On 5/5/2019 8:42 PM, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
> On 5/5/2019 6:41 PM, Dave Froble wrote:
>> On 5/5/2019 4:18 PM, seasoned_geek wrote:
>>> On Monday, April 29, 2019 at 10:43:32 AM UTC-5, Stephen Hoffman wrote:
>>>> As was mentioned else-thread, ACMS integration with SYSUAF and logical
>>>> names?  Yeah, okay, but that's not selling this for me.  SYSUAF and
>>>> logical names and ilk are among the more problematic OpenVMS features.
>
>>> If you don't like the high quality things which make OpenVMS, VMS
>>> (common SYSUAF, logical name tables with logicals actually in them,
>>> and file versioning) why don't you just go develop on Linux? <Grin>
>
>>> I love all those things you hate. If they go away there is no reason
>>> for VMS to even exist.
>>
>> For me, there is a whole bunch of reality in that last statement.
>>
>> DLM
>
> The API is horrible.

Just what is so horrible?  If it was hard to use, then I would not like 
it.  Do I need to post examples to show just how easy it is to use?

> But it is a nice feature.
>
> It is just not unique for VMS - only the tight integration with the OS
> is relative unique.

If you like adding extras, which may or may not all work together, then 
fine, go for it.  Me, I like things that "just work".

> If you like the API then the *nix libdlm has the exact awful API.
>
> :-)

Usable from Basic?

>> Logicals
>
> Logicals are OK.

Logicals are great, if used appropriately.

> But other platforms has found different solutions for the same problems.

"Different solutions" in no way implies ease of use and flexibility.

>> Basic
>
> :-)

That all you can say about the best feature?

>> Common calling std ( well, except for things such as C, C++, et;al
>
> Very nice.
>
> But also limited to procedural (not-OO).

OO is overrated ....

> JVM and CLR platforms can do the same with OO.
>
>> BACKUP
>
> For general backup VMS BACKUP is extremely primitive.

Primitive?  If "just working" is primitive, then I'm all for primitive. 
  It's also "just there".

> And even decades ago more advanced backup products where
> available.

Available, yes.  Part of the base OS distribution?  Not that I'm aware 
of.  I'm still unable to copy a WEENDOZE system disk.

>> Stand Alone BACKUP !!!!!
>
> Also primitive, but I like it too.
>
> It solves one specific problem in a simple easy to
> use way.
>
> And one need to restore then one really appreciate simple and safe.
>
>> Oh, Ok, VMS clustering
>
> Everybody does clustering today.

Not VMS Clustering.  A few may have shared everything capabilities, but 
most don't.

> Not the same way as VMS, but ...
>
>> RMS (yeah, it's old, but at least it's there)
>
> The extensive set of file attributes can be nice and provide
> some options.
>
> But if you think index-sequential files then there are a ton
> of those out there (if they are old they are called iSAM, if they
> are new they are called NoSQL key-value store).

What's your definition of "out there"?

RMS is always there on VMS.

>> As for passwords, no matter what is done, it will never be secure.  If
>> anyone get a copy of your SYSUAF or whatever replaces it.
>
> Long passwords and a good (read: slow) password hash algorithm
> can ensure that it takes a few million years to brute force it.

Are you sure about that time?  Just how long of a password is needed for 
that?  Perhaps one where you fall asleep before finishing typing?

Regardless, the time doesn't matter, if it can be done.


-- 
David Froble                       Tel: 724-529-0450
Dave Froble Enterprises, Inc.      E-Mail: davef at tsoft-inc.com
DFE Ultralights, Inc.
170 Grimplin Road
Vanderbilt, PA  15486