David, My late father said "right tool for the right job". So I lean that direction also. I wonder if the reasoning for other non Java type APIs are performance on z/OS. I have no personal experience with z/OS Java ..so I can't - won't judge. But I would like to know how Java performs on a z/OS box..
I have created some XML the hard way without using the new COBOL - Assembler enhancements. Regards, Scott On Oct 22, 2017, 1:45 AM -0400, David Crayford <[email protected]>, wrote: > Did you mean REXX the "lame" horse? :) Only joking! I was reading about > the new "z/OS client web enablement toolkit" which comes with a REXX API > for HTTP requests and a JSON serializer/parser > https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.3.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r3.ieac100/ieac1-cwe-json.htm. > It's great that IBM are writing APIs like this to enable languages with > limited capabilities to do modern stuff, but I couldn't help thinking > that's a lot of faffing around calling multiple services just to yank > some data from from a JSON string. It's interesting to compare that > approach to other scripting languages that run just fine on z/OS > http://groovy-lang.org/json.html. > > > On 22/10/2017 1:07 AM, scott Ford wrote: > > David: > > > > Very true. I learned 'rexx' -- 'the wonder horse', when it first came out > > on VM/SPx ..I *think* ..so its been one of my gotos and Assembler of course. > > Taught myself C and some C#. A little Java .. Learned basics of HTML.. > > > > Scott > > > > On Sat, Oct 21, 2017 at 10:54 AM, David Crayford <[email protected] > > wrote: > > > > > Horses for courses. I'm sure Ed Jaffe doesn't use the HLASM macros for > > > EJES-Web. > > > > > > > > > > > > On 21/10/2017 9:20 PM, scott Ford wrote: > > > > > > > I didn't come up into Development via the programming channel. So I had > > > > to learn things like John M. Once said trial and error. I remember the > > > > HIPO > > > > diagrams ? My memory is like Ed's , a tad hazy. > > > > I liked the structured HLASM Share presentation by Ed Jaffe. It just > > > > make > > > > sense to me. > > > > I have played with C++ , our shop is Java...ugh > > > > > > > > On Oct 21, 2017, 2:53 AM -0400, David Crayford <[email protected]>, > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On 21/10/2017 7:41 AM, Steve Smith wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Bjorne Stroustrup (the inventor of C++, and incidentally the chair > > > > > > of > > > > > > computer science at my alma mater for 12 years) said something like, > > > > > > "You can shoot yourself in the foot with any language, but with C++ > > > > > > it's liable to blow your leg clean off." > > > > > > > > > > > Stroustrup said that in 1986 when the language was in it's infancy. If > > > > > you look at modern C++, C++11, C++14 and C++17 it's not just a face > > > > > lift > > > > > it's an entirely new language. Unfortunately, the z/OS C++ compiler > > > > > only > > > > > supports a limited subset of C++11. It's the only platform I work on > > > > > that > > > > > doesn't have a modern C++ compiler, which is ironic considering it's > > > > > the > > > > > only platform where a compiler doesn't come for free. > > > > > > > > > > Object-oriented design is not easy to do well. It's quite often done > > > > > > badly. When it's good, it's very good, but... (you know the rest). > > > > > > > > > > > I totally agree it's easy to do badly. But then again it's easy to do > > > > > well. All the lessons were learned back in the 90s. Prefer composition > > > > > over inheritance, in fact never use inheritance unless using abstract > > > > > base classes. Program to an interface not an implementation, use > > > > > design > > > > > patterns etc, etc. > > > > > > > > > > sas > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 20, 2017 at 4:06 PM, David W Noon > > > > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, 20 Oct 2017 18:30:25 +0000, Allan Staller > > > > > > > ([email protected]) wrote about "Re: too true: Vulture > > > > > > > Central on > > > > > > > "the next big thing"." (in > > > > > > > <[email protected] > > > > > > > 04.prod.outlook.com>): > > > > > > > > > > > > > > My understanding (albeit limited) is that O-O is modular > > > > > > > programming > > > > > > > > with the > > > > > > > > concept of "inheritance" added. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > There is considerably more than that. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > As a moron's guide to Object Oriented Programming (OOP) here is a > > > > > > > simple, layered approach: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The first part is encapsulation. This consists of laying out a > > > > > > > data > > > > > > > structure, called a class, that will be instantiated whenever it > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > needed. This data structure then has methods (an up-market term > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > subroutines and functions) associated with it, but most of these > > > > > > > methods > > > > > > > can only be invoked using an instance of the class. Thus, the > > > > > > > methods > > > > > > > are encapsulated by the class. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The second part is polymorphism. This allows a single method name > > > > > > > to be > > > > > > > used with different semantics, based on the class through which > > > > > > > it is > > > > > > > invoked and its argument signature. This is identical to the PL/I > > > > > > > GENERIC declaration, except the rules for monomorphic selection > > > > > > > on a > > > > > > > polymorphic name have to be coded explicitly in PL/I but are > > > > > > > inferred > > > > > > > by > > > > > > > the compiler in more modern languages. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The third part is inheritance. This permits new classes to be > > > > > > > declared > > > > > > > based on existing classes, with the new classes inheriting the > > > > > > > data > > > > > > > items in the structure and the methods encapsulated in the earlier > > > > > > > classes. These are called subclasses. The methods can be > > > > > > > overridden in > > > > > > > the subclasses if necessary. Additional data items can be added > > > > > > > to the > > > > > > > structure too. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually laying out a class requires a great deal of analysis. > > > > > > > This is > > > > > > > why people who can b.s. their way into senior analyst positions > > > > > > > rattle > > > > > > > on about Object Oriented Design (OOD) as if it were some kind of > > > > > > > magic. > > > > > > > There is no moron's guide to OOD, as it can be exceedingly > > > > > > > complex. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I am not sure if SP caused modular or vice-versa. > > > > > > > Modular programming came in with FORTRAN II in the late 1950s, > > > > > > > when it > > > > > > > started allowing FUNCTION and SUBROUTINE definitions. This is long > > > > > > > before Structured Programming. > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Dave [RLU #314465] > > > > > > > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- > > > > > > > *-*-*-*-*-* > > > > > > > [email protected] (David W Noon) > > > > > > > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*- > > > > > > > *-*-*-*-*-* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
