[Info-vax] VMS Software needs to port VAX DIBOL to OpenVMS X86 platform

[kemain.nospam at gmail.com]

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Info-vax <info-vax-bounces at rbnsn.com> On Behalf Of Steve Ives via
>Info-vax
>Sent: December-22-20 4:02 AM
>To: info-vax at rbnsn.com
>Cc: Steve Ives <steve.ives at gmail.com>
>Subject: Re: [Info-vax] VMS Software needs to port VAX DIBOL to OpenVMS
>X86 platform
>
>On Monday, December 21, 2020 at 6:07:19 PM UTC-8, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> On 12/21/2020 3:15 PM, 1tim.... at gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Saturday, December 19, 2020 at 6:35:01 PM UTC-7, Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>> >> On 12/19/2020 5:44 PM, 1tim.... at gmail.com wrote:
>> >>> here is a more modern Dibol example - not 99 bottles of beer. it was
>written just to test a String parser class, written in Dibol.
>> >>>
>> >>> import parser
>> >>> import System.Collections
>> >>>
>> >>> record
>> >>>
>> >>> parse , at StringParser
>> >>> arry , at ArrayList
>> >>> proc
>> >>> parse = new StringParser() ;; create instance of parser
>> >> Again the code is for .NET platform (System.Collections.ArrayList).
>> >>
>> >> If all modern Dibol code is being written for .NET (.NET is a great
>> >> platform so I can understand that) then that may explain why Dibol
>> >> on VMS x86-64 is still TBD.
>> >
>> > wrong, that is OpenVMS Code. And Linux Code. That is Modern DBL
>> You got System.Collections.ArrayList on VMS??
>>
>> Arne
>
>Yes! Since V9 which was released in April 2007, Synergy DBL, in addition to
>being a procedural language like DIBOL was (programs, subroutines and
>functions), is also an OO language, with namespaces, classes, objects,
>methods, properties, enums, inheritance, overloading, constructors and
>destructors, etc. And YES, even on VMS!
>
>Our OO support pre-dates our support for Microsoft .NET, which was
>introduced in our 9.5 release in November 2010, but we knew we were going
>to support .NET, so we kept things as compatible as possible. So ...
>System.Collections.ArrayList is a collection of objects, just like it is in .NET,
>even on VMS!
>
>The cool thing is, like with EVERYTHING we do, you don't have to re-write to
>take advantage. OO can be used from within 40-year-old procedural code, and
>40-year-old procedural code can be called from within OO apps. Best of both
>worlds.
>
>This dedication to, and obsession with forward and backward compatibility is
>one of the main reasons that we are still in business after almost 45 years of
>servicing "DIBOL".
>
>Steve Ives
>Product Manager
>Synergy/DE
>https://www.synergex.com
>

Steve,

Very cool strategy that aligns with what I believe most Customers today will agree with i.e., they would much rather adopt a "upgrade and integrate" strategy than spend huge $'s and time to adopt a "rip and replace" strategy.

Imho, forcing any Customer on any OS platform to "rip and replace" solutions causes that Customer all sorts of pain - both with their internal politics and big business impacts.


Regards,

Kerry Main
Kerry dot main at starkgaming dot com






-- 
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com