Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
And here I thought you were referring to a z/OS release about 20 years into the future, you know, the next one after z/OS 2.09. :-) Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of David Crayford Sent: Friday, July 05, 2013 5:52 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific) My bad. Errant zero. On 05/07/2013, at 6:39 PM, Mike Schwab mike.a.sch...@gmail.com wrote: z/OS 2.10? In 2023? I haven't even seen the announcement for z/OS 2.02. On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 2:06 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/07/2013 2:56 PM, Martin Packer wrote: If that's true in Another World I wonder what it'd take to make it true in THIS one. For a start somebody to port OOREXX to z/OS. That's not going to happen until somebody first ports a recent version of GNU autotools. That's not going to happen until at least z/OS 2.10 when the new GNU extended streams API is available. We may be waiting a while... The EBCDIC stuff in OOREXX is mostly complete. I did that years ago. I bailed when it became clear that fixing the build system was an intractable problem. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN The information contained in this e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any unauthorized use, disclosure, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited and that you will be held responsible for any such unauthorized activity, including liability for any resulting damages. As appropriate, such incident(s) may also be reported to law enforcement. If you received this e-mail in error, please reply to sender and destroy or delete the message and any attachments. Thank you. NOTICE: This e-mail message, including any attachments and appended messages, is for the sole use of the intended recipients and may contain confidential and legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, any review, dissemination, distribution, copying, storage or other use of all or any portion of this message is strictly prohibited. If you received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete this message in its entirety. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
At 01:08 -0500 on 07/06/2013, Michael G Phillips wrote about Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific): I guess I got to table a little late... but my worst fear is the Ready, Shot, Aim demands from project managers that don't seem to have a clue about investigating all the issues of a project! On a similar issue, wasting lots of time coding a project where the ultimate user was not consulted on the design and thus creating something that did not meet their needs. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
I guess I got to table a little late... but my worst fear is the Ready, Shot, Aim demands from project managers that don't seem to have a clue about investigating all the issues of a project! As for tools, my bag includes BAL, COBOL, masm, Perl, bash and ksh. Maybe not it's full as others but I do respect the old saw that if the only tool you know is a hammer, all your problems look like nails! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
On 5 July 2013 03:06, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/07/2013 2:56 PM, Martin Packer wrote: If that's true in Another World I wonder what it'd take to make it true in THIS one. For a start somebody to port OOREXX to z/OS. That's not going to happen until somebody first ports a recent version of GNU autotools. That's not going to happen until at least z/OS 2.10 when the new GNU extended streams API is available. We may be waiting a while... The EBCDIC stuff in OOREXX is mostly complete. I did that years ago. I bailed when it became clear that fixing the build system was an intractable problem. Is it not feasible to build on some other system with a cross compiler for zArch? Tony H. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
If that's true in Another World I wonder what it'd take to make it true in THIS one. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+...@patriot.net To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, Date: 07/05/2013 12:25 AM Subject:Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific) Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu In b870629719727b4ba82a6c06a31c291239e0fad...@hqmailsvr01.voltage.com, on 07/04/2013 at 05:54 AM, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com said: In an alternate universe, Rexx had the equivalent of CPAN created by the community, and we all use it instead...and are much happier. In an alternate universe the standard REXX for CMS and TSO is OREXX with full block structuring, ranges, regexen and some control structures stolen from Icon and Perl. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2http://patriot.net/~shmuel We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
On 5/07/2013 2:56 PM, Martin Packer wrote: If that's true in Another World I wonder what it'd take to make it true in THIS one. For a start somebody to port OOREXX to z/OS. That's not going to happen until somebody first ports a recent version of GNU autotools. That's not going to happen until at least z/OS 2.10 when the new GNU extended streams API is available. We may be waiting a while... The EBCDIC stuff in OOREXX is mostly complete. I did that years ago. I bailed when it became clear that fixing the build system was an intractable problem. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+...@patriot.net To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, Date: 07/05/2013 12:25 AM Subject:Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific) Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu In b870629719727b4ba82a6c06a31c291239e0fad...@hqmailsvr01.voltage.com, on 07/04/2013 at 05:54 AM, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com said: In an alternate universe, Rexx had the equivalent of CPAN created by the community, and we all use it instead...and are much happier. In an alternate universe the standard REXX for CMS and TSO is OREXX with full block structuring, ranges, regexen and some control structures stolen from Icon and Perl. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
Might be a silly question but do we have to use THEIR build system? In its entirety? Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, Date: 07/05/2013 08:06 AM Subject:Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific) Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu On 5/07/2013 2:56 PM, Martin Packer wrote: If that's true in Another World I wonder what it'd take to make it true in THIS one. For a start somebody to port OOREXX to z/OS. That's not going to happen until somebody first ports a recent version of GNU autotools. That's not going to happen until at least z/OS 2.10 when the new GNU extended streams API is available. We may be waiting a while... The EBCDIC stuff in OOREXX is mostly complete. I did that years ago. I bailed when it became clear that fixing the build system was an intractable problem. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+...@patriot.net To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, Date: 07/05/2013 12:25 AM Subject:Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific) Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu In b870629719727b4ba82a6c06a31c291239e0fad...@hqmailsvr01.voltage.com, on 07/04/2013 at 05:54 AM, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com said: In an alternate universe, Rexx had the equivalent of CPAN created by the community, and we all use it instead...and are much happier. In an alternate universe the standard REXX for CMS and TSO is OREXX with full block structuring, ranges, regexen and some control structures stolen from Icon and Perl. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
z/OS 2.10? In 2023? I haven't even seen the announcement for z/OS 2.02. On Fri, Jul 5, 2013 at 2:06 AM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com wrote: On 5/07/2013 2:56 PM, Martin Packer wrote: If that's true in Another World I wonder what it'd take to make it true in THIS one. For a start somebody to port OOREXX to z/OS. That's not going to happen until somebody first ports a recent version of GNU autotools. That's not going to happen until at least z/OS 2.10 when the new GNU extended streams API is available. We may be waiting a while... The EBCDIC stuff in OOREXX is mostly complete. I did that years ago. I bailed when it became clear that fixing the build system was an intractable problem. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
On 5/07/2013 4:17 PM, Martin Packer wrote: Might be a silly question but do we have to use THEIR build system? In its entirety? No. But it's a lot of work if you don't. Most portable software comes with a configure script that builds a makefile with the correct configuration for your system. That may vary between different versions of z/OS depending on what is available in the C/C++ runtime. For a big port like OOREXX I just couldn't be bothered to expend that much energy. It can be done but would need investment and capable people to do it. I'm not that interested any more because there are easier options. If I wanted a language that only runs in USS I would look at JVM languages like Scala, Closure, Groovy. To get OOREXX to load modules from a PDS is non-trivial and to integrate it into TSO/ISPF is very difficult. And after all we're talking about scripting languages which are easy to learn. I would rather learn a new language. But I'm probably in the minority there. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, Date: 07/05/2013 08:06 AM Subject:Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific) Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu On 5/07/2013 2:56 PM, Martin Packer wrote: If that's true in Another World I wonder what it'd take to make it true in THIS one. For a start somebody to port OOREXX to z/OS. That's not going to happen until somebody first ports a recent version of GNU autotools. That's not going to happen until at least z/OS 2.10 when the new GNU extended streams API is available. We may be waiting a while... The EBCDIC stuff in OOREXX is mostly complete. I did that years ago. I bailed when it became clear that fixing the build system was an intractable problem. Cheers, Martin Martin Packer, zChampion, Principal Systems Investigator, Worldwide Banking Center of Excellence, IBM +44-7802-245-584 email: martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com Twitter / Facebook IDs: MartinPacker Blog: https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/mydeveloperworks/blogs/MartinPacker From: Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+...@patriot.net To: IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu, Date: 07/05/2013 12:25 AM Subject:Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific) Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@listserv.ua.edu In b870629719727b4ba82a6c06a31c291239e0fad...@hqmailsvr01.voltage.com, on 07/04/2013 at 05:54 AM, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com said: In an alternate universe, Rexx had the equivalent of CPAN created by the community, and we all use it instead...and are much happier. In an alternate universe the standard REXX for CMS and TSO is OREXX with full block structuring, ranges, regexen and some control structures stolen from Icon and Perl. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
In ofb092d22a.92a4e671-on80257b9f.002531ef-80257b9f.00262...@uk.ibm.com, on 07/05/2013 at 07:56 AM, Martin Packer martin_pac...@uk.ibm.com said: If that's true in Another World I wonder what it'd take to make it true in THIS one. $ -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2http://patriot.net/~shmuel We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
In 51d6708d.9070...@gmail.com, on 07/05/2013 at 03:06 PM, David Crayford dcrayf...@gmail.com said: That's not going to happen until at least z/OS 2.10 ITYM z/OS 2.1; 2.10 would be a long wait. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2http://patriot.net/~shmuel We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
Mark IV had a ruler too... On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Anthony Babonas tonybabo...@icloud.com wrote: Rising to the defense of RPG, what other language had its own ruler? Talk about ease of coding! Ah the nostalgia.sigh. Sent from Tony's iPhone. On Jul 3, 2013, at 9:50 PM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com wrote: I've not run across many languages that I considered ugly. RPG II was one. EasyTrieve Plus is not ugly, but I don't much like it. The newest IBM COBOL is rather nice, albeit still wordy. The first COBOL that I learned: ANSI COBOL back in the 1970s made me puke, after learning PL/I of the same era. The main thing that I hate is a manager saying use xyz, but refrain from using the new omega facilities. The reason being that everybody in the shop knows the basic xyz language, but is not familiar with the omega features. So I am chained down to the least common denominator for ease of understanding by those who simply won't learn new stuff. Case in point in my current shop, at least in the past, was not using any z/OS UNIX facilities because they were just too esoteric and complicated. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In CAAJSdjg1jRs6DrNV7xzAftEoGcojyeGf=fvwkbdh_idvozp...@mail.gmail.com, on 07/03/2013 at 07:10 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said: http://www.itworld.com/it-management/363424/only-thing-programmers-have-fear-all-these-things I say yes to most. #4 is being forced to learn or use some specific technology What if you consider a language to be ugly but also consider it to be the best tool for the job? I don't care for Perl syntax, but between the expressive power of the language and the modules available in CPAN, I find myself using it regardless. That's not a boss telling me that I have to - it's my own decision. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. If this had been an actual emergency, do you really think we'd stick around to tell you? Maranatha! John McKown -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Wayne V. Bickerdike -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
David Crayford wrote: Perl is definately ugly. It has a very large and cryptic grammar which makes it difficult to learn. I find it unpleasant to program in but I also dislike most shell scripting languages. The best thing about perl is the command line hacks. This is why I always say I have angry Perl skillz - because every time I have to use the language it pes me off! In an alternate universe, Rexx had the equivalent of CPAN created by the community, and we all use it instead...and are much happier. ...phsiii -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
Wow! Never heard of the language but I'm envious. On 7/4/2013 5:59 AM, Wayne Bickerdike wrote: Mark IV had a ruler too... On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Anthony Babonas tonybabo...@icloud.com wrote: Rising to the defense of RPG, what other language had its own ruler? Talk about ease of coding! Ah the nostalgia.sigh. Sent from Tony's iPhone. On Jul 3, 2013, at 9:50 PM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com wrote: I've not run across many languages that I considered ugly. RPG II was one. EasyTrieve Plus is not ugly, but I don't much like it. The newest IBM COBOL is rather nice, albeit still wordy. The first COBOL that I learned: ANSI COBOL back in the 1970s made me puke, after learning PL/I of the same era. The main thing that I hate is a manager saying use xyz, but refrain from using the new omega facilities. The reason being that everybody in the shop knows the basic xyz language, but is not familiar with the omega features. So I am chained down to the least common denominator for ease of understanding by those who simply won't learn new stuff. Case in point in my current shop, at least in the past, was not using any z/OS UNIX facilities because they were just too esoteric and complicated. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In CAAJSdjg1jRs6DrNV7xzAftEoGcojyeGf=fvwkbdh_idvozp...@mail.gmail.com, on 07/03/2013 at 07:10 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said: http://www.itworld.com/it-management/363424/only-thing-programmers-have-fear-all-these-things I say yes to most. #4 is being forced to learn or use some specific technology What if you consider a language to be ugly but also consider it to be the best tool for the job? I don't care for Perl syntax, but between the expressive power of the language and the modules available in CPAN, I find myself using it regardless. That's not a boss telling me that I have to - it's my own decision. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. If this had been an actual emergency, do you really think we'd stick around to tell you? Maranatha! John McKown -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
Working most of these..RPG was a bit of challenge ..easytrieve wasn't too , but I have In SAS..now MarkIV, haven't heard of that one. I also learned Assembler, Cobol and the PL/1 ...like several of the guys I liked PL/1 ... Scott ford www.identityforge.com from my IPAD 'Infinite wisdom through infinite means' On Jul 4, 2013, at 1:28 PM, Tony Babonas tonybabo...@icloud.com wrote: Wow! Never heard of the language but I'm envious. On 7/4/2013 5:59 AM, Wayne Bickerdike wrote: Mark IV had a ruler too... On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 1:19 PM, Anthony Babonas tonybabo...@icloud.com wrote: Rising to the defense of RPG, what other language had its own ruler? Talk about ease of coding! Ah the nostalgia.sigh. Sent from Tony's iPhone. On Jul 3, 2013, at 9:50 PM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com wrote: I've not run across many languages that I considered ugly. RPG II was one. EasyTrieve Plus is not ugly, but I don't much like it. The newest IBM COBOL is rather nice, albeit still wordy. The first COBOL that I learned: ANSI COBOL back in the 1970s made me puke, after learning PL/I of the same era. The main thing that I hate is a manager saying use xyz, but refrain from using the new omega facilities. The reason being that everybody in the shop knows the basic xyz language, but is not familiar with the omega features. So I am chained down to the least common denominator for ease of understanding by those who simply won't learn new stuff. Case in point in my current shop, at least in the past, was not using any z/OS UNIX facilities because they were just too esoteric and complicated. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In CAAJSdjg1jRs6DrNV7xzAftEoGcojyeGf=fvwkbdh_idvozp...@mail.gmail.com, on 07/03/2013 at 07:10 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said: http://www.itworld.com/it-management/363424/only-thing-programmers-have-fear-all-these-things I say yes to most. #4 is being forced to learn or use some specific technology What if you consider a language to be ugly but also consider it to be the best tool for the job? I don't care for Perl syntax, but between the expressive power of the language and the modules available in CPAN, I find myself using it regardless. That's not a boss telling me that I have to - it's my own decision. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. If this had been an actual emergency, do you really think we'd stick around to tell you? Maranatha! John McKown -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
In article b870629719727b4ba82a6c06a31c291239e0fad...@hqmailsvr01.voltage.com you write: In an alternate universe, Rexx had the equivalent of CPAN created by the community, and we all use it instead...and are much happier. Hi Phil, I have been following this thread wondering if someone would mention Rexx. My favorite language. Thanks. -- Rich Greenberg Sarasota, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 941 378 2097 Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself my dogs only.VM'er since CP-67 Canines: Val,Red,Shasta,Zero,Casey Cinnar (At the bridge) Owner:Chinook-L Canines: Red Max (Siberians) Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
In article 20130704194045.f3e3824...@panix5.panix.com you write: In article b870629719727b4ba82a6c06a31c291239e0fad...@hqmailsvr01.voltage.com you write: In an alternate universe, Rexx had the equivalent of CPAN created by the community, and we all use it instead...and are much happier. Hi Phil, I have been following this thread wondering if someone would mention Rexx. My favorite language. Thanks. My apologies to the group. The above was intended to be a private email to phil, but I sed it up. -- Rich Greenberg Sarasota, FL, USA richgr atsign panix.com + 1 941 378 2097 Eastern time. N6LRT I speak for myself my dogs only.VM'er since CP-67 Canines: Val,Red,Shasta,Zero,Casey Cinnar (At the bridge) Owner:Chinook-L Canines: Red Max (Siberians) Retired at the beach Asst Owner:Sibernet-L -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
In b870629719727b4ba82a6c06a31c291239e0fad...@hqmailsvr01.voltage.com, on 07/04/2013 at 05:54 AM, Phil Smith p...@voltage.com said: In an alternate universe, Rexx had the equivalent of CPAN created by the community, and we all use it instead...and are much happier. In an alternate universe the standard REXX for CMS and TSO is OREXX with full block structuring, ranges, regexen and some control structures stolen from Icon and Perl. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT Atid/2http://patriot.net/~shmuel We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
Being forced to use inappropriate technology is very disagreeable, but it is hard to judge the appropriateness of a technology until one has mastered at least some part of it. My own guess is that few of us know too much, I spent part of yesterday with a sysprog who has been doing what he does for 17 years, but at the end of the day it was clear that he had never mastered the facilities of the linkage editor and now the binder. It is, I am sure, arguable that the binder is disagreeable; but without mastery of what it does one is crippled in a z/OS environment. Every discipline, programming or art history, requires its practitioners to master some disagreeable or merely boring techniques and to do a certain amount of scut work. Even eminent surgeons must sometimes lance boils. John Gilmore, Ashland, MA 01721 - USA -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
I guess that might be covered under hurting the user. I don't write APF code, so I don't think that I can create a security hole. I don't do RACF or other ESM type calls. I assume that RACF has been set up properly and all I do is normal non-APF type work. I used to write some z/OS or product exits. But my current manager despises exits because they need to be maintained. We sometimes have a hard enough time maintaining the configuration options, when they are installed as a module update via SMP/E. I prefer configuration data sets. Preferably with simple lines which are like option=value or maybe option=(value1,value2). I really appreciate IBM setting the SORT and LE options via PARMLIB. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Elardus Engelbrecht elardus.engelbre...@sita.co.za wrote: John McKown wrote: I say yes to most. Agreed. ;-) What about creating a security hole in your program? For me this is my greatest fear. Groete / Greetings Elardus Engelbrecht -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. If this had been an actual emergency, do you really think we'd stick around to tell you? Maranatha! John McKown -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
In CAAJSdjg1jRs6DrNV7xzAftEoGcojyeGf=fvwkbdh_idvozp...@mail.gmail.com, on 07/03/2013 at 07:10 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said: http://www.itworld.com/it-management/363424/only-thing-programmers-have-fear-all-these-things I say yes to most. #4 is being forced to learn or use some specific technology What if you consider a language to be ugly but also consider it to be the best tool for the job? I don't care for Perl syntax, but between the expressive power of the language and the modules available in CPAN, I find myself using it regardless. That's not a boss telling me that I have to - it's my own decision. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
I've not run across many languages that I considered ugly. RPG II was one. EasyTrieve Plus is not ugly, but I don't much like it. The newest IBM COBOL is rather nice, albeit still wordy. The first COBOL that I learned: ANSI COBOL back in the 1970s made me puke, after learning PL/I of the same era. The main thing that I hate is a manager saying use xyz, but refrain from using the new omega facilities. The reason being that everybody in the shop knows the basic xyz language, but is not familiar with the omega features. So I am chained down to the least common denominator for ease of understanding by those who simply won't learn new stuff. Case in point in my current shop, at least in the past, was not using any z/OS UNIX facilities because they were just too esoteric and complicated. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In CAAJSdjg1jRs6DrNV7xzAftEoGcojyeGf=fvwkbdh_idvozp...@mail.gmail.com, on 07/03/2013 at 07:10 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said: http://www.itworld.com/it-management/363424/only-thing-programmers-have-fear-all-these-things I say yes to most. #4 is being forced to learn or use some specific technology What if you consider a language to be ugly but also consider it to be the best tool for the job? I don't care for Perl syntax, but between the expressive power of the language and the modules available in CPAN, I find myself using it regardless. That's not a boss telling me that I have to - it's my own decision. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. If this had been an actual emergency, do you really think we'd stick around to tell you? Maranatha! John McKown -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
On 4/07/2013 9:59 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) wrote: In CAAJSdjg1jRs6DrNV7xzAftEoGcojyeGf=fvwkbdh_idvozp...@mail.gmail.com, on 07/03/2013 at 07:10 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said: http://www.itworld.com/it-management/363424/only-thing-programmers-have-fear-all-these-things I say yes to most. #4 is being forced to learn or use some specific technology What if you consider a language to be ugly but also consider it to be the best tool for the job? I don't care for Perl syntax, but between the expressive power of the language and the modules available in CPAN, I find myself using it regardless. That's not a boss telling me that I have to - it's my own decision. Perl is definately ugly. It has a very large and cryptic grammar which makes it difficult to learn. I find it unpleasant to program in but I also dislike most shell scripting languages. The best thing about perl is the command line hacks. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: What programmer's fear (not IBM specific)
Rising to the defense of RPG, what other language had its own ruler? Talk about ease of coding! Ah the nostalgia.sigh. Sent from Tony's iPhone. On Jul 3, 2013, at 9:50 PM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com wrote: I've not run across many languages that I considered ugly. RPG II was one. EasyTrieve Plus is not ugly, but I don't much like it. The newest IBM COBOL is rather nice, albeit still wordy. The first COBOL that I learned: ANSI COBOL back in the 1970s made me puke, after learning PL/I of the same era. The main thing that I hate is a manager saying use xyz, but refrain from using the new omega facilities. The reason being that everybody in the shop knows the basic xyz language, but is not familiar with the omega features. So I am chained down to the least common denominator for ease of understanding by those who simply won't learn new stuff. Case in point in my current shop, at least in the past, was not using any z/OS UNIX facilities because they were just too esoteric and complicated. On Wed, Jul 3, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In CAAJSdjg1jRs6DrNV7xzAftEoGcojyeGf=fvwkbdh_idvozp...@mail.gmail.com, on 07/03/2013 at 07:10 AM, John McKown john.archie.mck...@gmail.com said: http://www.itworld.com/it-management/363424/only-thing-programmers-have-fear-all-these-things I say yes to most. #4 is being forced to learn or use some specific technology What if you consider a language to be ugly but also consider it to be the best tool for the job? I don't care for Perl syntax, but between the expressive power of the language and the modules available in CPAN, I find myself using it regardless. That's not a boss telling me that I have to - it's my own decision. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- This is a test of the Emergency Broadcast System. If this had been an actual emergency, do you really think we'd stick around to tell you? Maranatha! John McKown -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
