On Thu, 1 Nov 2007 18:21:35 -0500, Patrick O'Keefe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>FSVO "better", I guess. I assume XL C/C++ is better than PL/X >like C/C++ is better than PL/I. And Windows is better than OS/2. I'd assume that something you _can_ use is "better" than something you _can't_. The likelihood of using PL/X and OOPL/X (which, during my years at IBM, I certainly considered to be _better_ than C/C++). Unless, of course, you subscribe to Spock's observation to Stonn: "After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true." Scott Fagen Enterprise Systems Management ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
