Scott, for those of us not in the loop....what is/was HACS? On 12/11/2010 07:42 AM, Scott Rohling wrote: > Nope - we never distributed HACS externally. I also worked on HACS for > HONE/IBMLINK in the 80's - putting in mods for those specific systems in the > US. I remember when we hit the architectural limit of HACS when we reached > 64K guests on a single system .. > > Scott Rohling > > On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 3:59 AM, James Laing - Hotmail < > james_la...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote: > >> Been out of the game for a long time.. >> >> Does IBM not distribute some version of HACS .. I worked on in the 90's ? >> took over from Aad Van Tol .. IBM Uithoorn? An amazing programmer and top >> guy! >> >> *From:* George Henke/NYLIC <george_he...@newyorklife.com> >> *Sent:* Friday, December 10, 2010 11:41 PM >> *To:* IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU >> *Subject:* Re: Mandatory ESMs? >> >> z/VM has LE ported over from z/OS. >> >> So things cannot be all that bad in the world of CMS compilers. >> >> "I have heard people rant and rave and bellow >> That we're done and we might as well be dead >> But I'm only a cockeyed optimist >> And I can't get it into my head" >> >> Oscar Hammerstein >> >> >> >> *David Boyes <dbo...@sinenomine.net>* >> Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> >> >> 12/10/2010 05:34 PM >> Please respond to >> The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> >> >> To >> IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU >> cc >> Subject >> Re: Mandatory ESMs? >> >> >> >> >>> GCC for CMS [snip] >> >> Building a non-trivial program that involves existing libraries or code >> that must access things like CSL services is pretty hard to do with the CMS >> GCC port. It's a good tool for writing apps totally from scratch, but it's >> not something yet that I would rely on for really large mission-critical >> applications. The generated code is still very conservative in the >> instructions it uses and what machine functions it can/does exploit, to it's >> detriment. >> >> I'm concerned that there's no Enterprise COBOL, no more development on >> FORTRAN, no up to date PL/1… etc, etc. The IBM C/C++ compiler is still >> maintained and current, but only because it's necessary for CP development. >> You can't order CMS VSAM any longer, so there's no direct access file >> capability from the old compilers without directly interfacing to assembler >> yourself. Nothing's been touched in SQL/DS for VM for ages now. TSM is gone. >> 2/3 of the function of DFSMS/VM is pretty much gutted in terms of usability >> or functionality. ISPF/VM is ancient, and pretty much no longer maintained >> in any real sense (a lot has happened in ISPF since 3.2). No Java since 1.3 >> (although that's no real loss, IMHO). APL2 is frozen in time. Pascal is >> frozen in time (and only still exists to service the bits of the VM TCP >> stack that aren't in C or assembler). Ditto RXSQL. Ditto Kerberos (the >> shipped K4 is nothing you'd want to build new apps on). Interactive >> Debugger? DMS/CMS? All pretty much in a zombie state. OpenVM? Not much to >> see there either — although we finally have some reason for BFS to exist >> with the new SSL server (not that it's all that much fun to use). >> >> You're pretty much left with assembler, C, C++, XEDIT, REXX and CMS >> Pipelines as the supported application development languages on CMS. >> That's a pretty powerful set of tooling by itself, but if you're trying to >> preflight applications and do development in the CMS world that is intended >> for other places and other uses, that's not much. 3 out of 6 aren't widely >> portable outside VM at all, and the other 3 are restricted to a small number >> of interfaces with a tiny subset of their function on other platforms. >> >> The writing is pretty much on the wall. I know the reason why, but it's >> still sad. >> >> -- db >> >> >
-- Dave Jones V/Soft Software www.vsoft-software.com Houston, TX 281.578.7544
