In our case, we are looking for Java solutions so that we can utilize an underutilized ZIIP (and try and curb MLC charges and postpone future upgrades).
On 22 January 2014 15:36, John McKown <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 7:53 PM, David Crayford <[email protected]> > wrote: > <snip> > > > Of course, if you don't have a zIIP you wouldn't go near it with a ten > > foot barge pole. > > > > total agreement. It is why we don't use it. Well, other than the usual "we > have never used it in the past!" which is also articulated by our > programmer as "But it's not COBOL!" Now wouldn't that be a kick? An > Enterprise COBOL compatible compiler which produced Java byte code. That > would likely sell a lot of zAAPs. > > > > > > I've never been of fan of Java the language. IMO, C# was Java done > > properly. The JVM is another matter. The original > > designers of Java got it right separating the language from the runtime. > > It means I have the choice of lots > > of much nicer languages like Javascript, Jython, JRuby, Groovy, Clojure > > and my particular favorite Scala. > > > > > Ah, good point. I guess I should have phrased the question better. I was > mainly interested in whether shops would reject a product because it > required the use of the Java JVM to run some of the programs. I didn't > really mean to imply Java as the source, but as the "run time". > > > -- > Wasn't there something about a PASCAL programmer knowing the value of > everything and the Wirth of nothing? > > Maranatha! <>< > John McKown > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
