Hi David,
You said: "... REXX is a niche language that's only used to any great
extend on mainframes and it's popularity is constantly eroding. The
mainframe needs to keep pace with the industry. ..."
1) ".... used to any great extend on mainframes ..."Last time I looked,
this is a MAINFRAME (my Caps Lock button isn't stuck) discussion group.
Niche or not, who cares?
2) It's popularity is "constantly eroding". Do you have facts to back up
your assertion? Even if true, who cares?
3) The mainframe "... needs to keep pace ..."? With 850,000,000,000
Lines of COBOL running US industry, the Mainframe does not have to keep
pace with anything.
Caveat: I've been programming in Rexx since the day it came out (on
VM/SP). Most of my usage is to simplify Systems Programming tasks, such
as, generating JCL and Commands to implement software updates/upgrades.
(I would never use it in any typical business application; instead, I
would use PL/I or COBOL.) If it takes a few extra nanoseconds, again,
who cares? Finally, learning Rexx is similar to the argument for
learning vi.
Vi comes installed with every *ix. Similarly, Rexx comes installed with
every z/OS and z/VM. (I've worked in places that don't let SysProgs
install anything other than what is licensed. No matter how good Lua is,
it might, therefore, not be available.)
Regards,
David
On 2023-03-02 07:36, David Crayford wrote:
On 2/3/23 19:48, René Jansen wrote:
I think 99% of the folks on this forum want a language that can run
in a TSO/ISPF environment hosted in PDS data sets. Lua can do that
and it's orders of magnitudes faster then REXX with the advantage of
package management. The next gen guys don't use TSO/ISPF and they're
going to use Python and couldn't give a hoot about NetRexx.
NetRexx can and does, using the IBM jzos classes, which are delivered
with its JVM’s.
Hmm, I don't think so. NetRexx programs can not reside in PDS data
sets. I don't get the point of NetRexx.
They can do a lot more with conventional MVS than LUA, I am sure.
Don't agree. Lua4z has a heap of integrations including TSO/ISPF
without VDEFINE. And you can write packages and applications using
PDS data sets. REXX is impoverished in this respect and you can't
share state or data structures between modules.
/https://na01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flua4z.github.io%2FLua4z%2F%2F%2F%2F&data=05%7C01%7C%7C5d8a2c3555eb47089d8508db1b1ade72%7C84df9e7fe9f640afb435aaaaaaaaaaaa%7C1%7C0%7C638133574493344939%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=DLt1zWGCKau0226D2noVdejr2ioh759Bw0DvdiQlwKw%3D&reserved=0
Not that anyone would do that, of course, being so much easier with
ISPF and Rexx and their shared variable pool. I have built dialogs in
COBOL and PL/1 but nothing beats Rexx for that, having not to VDEFINE
everything first.
That's subjective. I find it much easier to write code in Lua. A
programming language that supports OO, meta-programming, functional
programming and co-routines with just 20 reserved words is a thing of
absolute beauty and a testament to the designers. REXX is a niche
language that's only used to any great extend on mainframes and it's
popularity is constantly eroding. The mainframe needs to keep pace
with the industry.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
