Re: An interesting meeting with IBM

> ** WebSphere > > - v5.1.2 includes a 95% port of 4GL syntax into WebSphere. I remember a similar thing from the passed. Ca someone define 95 % ? - 95 % of the 4gl syntax ? - 95 % of the average 4gl code will work ? > - v5.1.2 is not considered quite complete enough to go into production > with > real 4GL code. v6 is expected to be complete enough for deployment. What hapenned to EGL ? > - WebSphere 4GL will be an enhanced 4GL that adds user interface features. New Era and windows 4gl was enhanced too :-( > - It's not clear, but it appears that the user interface statements of 4GL > have been replaced, and some sort of migration process must be applied to > the code to get it across. And after the migration we develop in the new 4gl (95% compatible) or an IBM Graphic Environment ? This means that the path of 4gl(s) will be syntax divergence (between Querix, 4js and IBM) ? And IBM commitement to open standards ? 4gl is a great language. Why destroy it making more diferent (incompatible) flavours ? Just make some quick money and get the users more tied to IBM ? > All-up, I'm quite optimistic about directions for Informix users. 4GL > users will probably be very happy with WebSphere. Well it is an improvement, but knowing this history of 4gl i need to see more in order to have even a litle smile. sending to informix-list sending to informix-list

sergio@moredata.pt wrote: >> ** WebSphere >> >> - v5.1.2 includes a 95% port of 4GL syntax into WebSphere. > > I remember a similar thing from the passed. > > Ca someone define 95 % ? > - 95 % of the 4gl syntax ? > - 95 % of the average 4gl code will work ? They suggested that most 4GL will go in neatly without change. Whether that requires the v6 (late this year) I can't be sure. Until we see it in action it's hard to say. I believe 5.1.2 has landed on the downloads site, but haven't had a chance to fetch it. >> - v5.1.2 is not considered quite complete enough to go into >> production with real 4GL code. v6 is expected to be complete >> enough for deployment. > > What hapenned to EGL ? EGL is still in there. 4GL has been added. Not knowing anything about WebSphere, but it sounds like 4GL has been added as another language. Anyone who's into languages will know that the syntax is far less important than the semantics. Plugging a new language form into the runtime will depend on their similarity and the willingness to throw development dollars at the task. Apparently the WebSphere engineers wanted to write translators, but there were a few "fairly heated" meetings where the Informixer's insisted this would not be acceptable. >> - WebSphere 4GL will be an enhanced 4GL that adds user >> interface features. > > New Era and windows 4gl was enhanced too :-( Yes - scary isn't it? That's exactly what I'm hoping isn't repeated. NewEra was great in theory, but turning the 4GL code inside out to suit the event driven model was hairy at best. 4JS approach is more obvious and ultimately far more appropriate to the needs of developers with plenty of pre-existing code. > And after the migration we develop in the new 4gl (95% compatible) > or an IBM Graphic Environment ? Yes. Seems like WebSphere is a complete development environment, and the 4GL will be maintained within. What's interesting from my point of view that that it's based on Eclipse (?) which I'm told is an open source IDE, supporting pluggable tools etc. Since we extensively use a code generator and a few other tools, I'm interested in the possibility of plugging them into WebSphere. > This means that the path of 4gl(s) will be syntax divergence (between > Querix, 4js and IBM) ? And IBM commitement to open standards ? I don't know. There wasn't anyone there who had first-hand knowledge of 4GL in websphere. Apparently the beta sites were all overseas (from an aussie perspective:-) They mentioned some meetings with 4JS too, and claim that 4JS will be "WebSphere" partners, whatever that means. Is there anyone out there who has been a WebSphere 4GL beta site? > 4gl is a great language. Why destroy it making more diferent > (incompatible) flavours ? Just make some quick money and get the users > more tied to IBM ? No, the idea is to give 4GL programmers something that will re-vamp it's future. They did consider very strongly whether to buy 4JS - story I heard at least a year ago was that 4JS ultimately refused to sell. I think that came straight from a 4JS mouth. Since WebSphere is IBM's premier IDE, it stands to reason that they'll plug 4GL into that, since it integrates it into a system instead of turning it into something that stands alone without really fitting in with anything else. As mentioned, nobody present actually knew any details "from the manuals" so I cannot comment on any differences or enhancements. >> All-up, I'm quite optimistic about directions for Informix users. >> 4GL users will probably be very happy with WebSphere. > > Well it is an improvement, but knowing this history of 4gl i need to > see more in order to have even a litle smile. Firstly, did I write that sentence exactly like that? That was the statement offered, not my opinion. Apologies if I implied I have any clue about how good WebSphere 4GL will be. re need to see more: Definitely. For WebSphere and all 4GL's, the next year will be very interesting indeed. The cost is also going to be crucial for many people. I'm very happy with Genero so WebSphere will have to be brilliant to change my direction. Unless the boss changes it for me :-)