Rich Gambrell writes:
>[Duane Percox writes:]
>>
>> Bruce pointed out the error of my ways:
>>
>[snip content!]
>>
>> Thanks Bruce! I guess it was too much to ask for three products from the
>> same company for the same system to operate together cohesively and
>>correctly!
>>
>And this kind of thing is why we used to buy MPE! Why will we in the future?
 
Whoa... don't pin this one on HP management! When you allow mixing of
languages through a common calling convention, somebody has to sort out the
differences in procedure calling semantics among all the supported
languages. Pascal and COBOL each have constructs that the other can't
understand by virtue of the languages themselves. I think that the COBOL
engineers made the wrong trade-off in this situation -- there's no way that
a trade-off could have been avoided -- but that's hardly a condemnation of
the overall design, which has proven very flexible.
 
-- Bruce
 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bruce Toback    Tel: (602) 996-8601| My candle burns at both ends;
OPT, Inc.            (800) 858-4507| It will not last the night;
11801 N. Tatum Blvd. Ste. 142      | But ah, my foes, and oh, my friends -
Phoenix AZ 85028                   | It gives a lovely light.
[log in to unmask]                 |     -- Edna St. Vincent Millay