> > > Portability is also an important factor for us. Once the > > batch is running on z/OS, the migration to other plateforms > > is very difficult. If the batch is running on linux, the > > choice for future migration is much better. > > That's a slightly different problem, however -- batch on Linux vs > converting to Java. Converting to Java doesn't make applications that > much more portable -- you're just dealing with a different set of > porting problems. (try running a application built with the Sun JVM on a > Windows system sometime -- Java isn't *that* portable). Running batch > on Linux is the same problem as running batch on any other Unix system. > > As I said, our results with batch Java apps is pretty mixed. Your > experience might be better, but there are a lot of issues that tend to > make it not worth the effort.
For java in batch applications, it's worth considering gcj, part of the Gnu Compiler Collection. If that's not up to snuff, consider hiring someone to help get it fixed. Bearing in mind the expense of any rewriting, I think that that wouldn't be a great additional burden. By using gcj, you will get the performance benefits of compiled code with the coding benefits. I'm not a great fan of C, especially for anything Cobol and PL/1 can do well. -- Cheers John Summerfield Microsoft's most solid OS: http://www.geocities.com/rcwoolley/ Note: mail delivered to me is deemed to be intended for me, for my disposition. ============================== If you don't like being told you're wrong, be right!
