NetRexx reality check

[Aviatrexx]

While I enjoy our discussion of NetRexx enhancement, and am not at all
shy about asserting my philosophic preferences, I think we all need to
recognize one absolute truth:

    It's going to be a while.

NetRexx is not yet open-sourced.  I have absolute confidence that IBM
will, in the fullness of time, assign the responsibility for NetRexx
to RexxLA.  It may be a delightful Christmas present.  It's not clear
_which_ Christmas, but it could be the next one.  (I think Guy Fawkes
Day would be nice, just for the symbolism.)  ;-)

RexxLA, because it is not evil, will do everything possible to include
anyone who is the least bit interested in contributing to the language
at any level.  It is never in its (or NetRexx's) best interest to turn
positive contributors away.

The most likely scenario is that the NetRexx development project will
be constituted similar to the ooRexx development project: the code
will be kept on a public repository like Sourceforge, the members of
the team (committers) will chosen meritocratically, and there will be
many channels of communication (among committers and users, for bug
submission, questions, and of course, suggestions for enhancements.

None of the above will require RexxLA membership.  Of course, there
will be discussion of NetRexx issues and topics on the RexxLA members
forum, so anyone who is deeply invested in NetRexx may find it
advantageous to be a RexxLA member, but it will not be required.

I think I can safely say that there will be quite a bit of work to do,
once the transfer is final, before open NetRexx can be released.
Furthermore, I expect that the first release will be exactly the same
code that we are using now.  It would not be prudent to introduce
changes to the language before the first stable release is out there.

So, while all this discussion of NetRexx enhancements is entertaining,
it carries no more immediate effect than leaning on a bar rail and
fulminating on the failures of the current administration and
suggesting what the government should do about it.

However, these discussions are being archived.  I have no doubt that
the NetRexx team will find them a valuable resource, so let's keep
those good ideas coming.

And if you _really_ think '=+' is a good idea, just wait until the
source is available and have your way with it.  :-)

-Chip-
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[George Hovey-2]

This is the first coherent thing I've heard about the open sourcing process.  THANK YOU!

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Chip Davis <[hidden email]> wrote:

While I enjoy our discussion of NetRexx enhancement, and am not at all shy about asserting my philosophic preferences, I think we all need to recognize one absolute truth:

  It's going to be a while.

NetRexx is not yet open-sourced.  I have absolute confidence that IBM will, in the fullness of time, assign the responsibility for NetRexx to RexxLA.  It may be a delightful Christmas present.  It's not clear _which_ Christmas, but it could be the next one.  (I think Guy Fawkes Day would be nice, just for the symbolism.)  ;-)

RexxLA, because it is not evil, will do everything possible to include anyone who is the least bit interested in contributing to the language at any level.  It is never in its (or NetRexx's) best interest to turn positive contributors away.

The most likely scenario is that the NetRexx development project will be constituted similar to the ooRexx development project: the code will be kept on a public repository like Sourceforge, the members of the team (committers) will chosen meritocratically, and there will be many channels of communication (among committers and users, for bug submission, questions, and of course, suggestions for enhancements.

None of the above will require RexxLA membership.  Of course, there will be discussion of NetRexx issues and topics on the RexxLA members forum, so anyone who is deeply invested in NetRexx may find it advantageous to be a RexxLA member, but it will not be required.

I think I can safely say that there will be quite a bit of work to do, once the transfer is final, before open NetRexx can be released. Furthermore, I expect that the first release will be exactly the same code that we are using now.  It would not be prudent to introduce changes to the language before the first stable release is out there.

So, while all this discussion of NetRexx enhancements is entertaining, it carries no more immediate effect than leaning on a bar rail and fulminating on the failures of the current administration and suggesting what the government should do about it.

However, these discussions are being archived.  I have no doubt that the NetRexx team will find them a valuable resource, so let's keep those good ideas coming.

And if you _really_ think '=+' is a good idea, just wait until the source is available and have your way with it.  :-)

-Chip-
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[George Hovey-2]

Chip,
As I mentioned earlier your exposition was most welcome.  However, it does raise some questions in my mind.

None of the above will require RexxLA membership.  Of course, there will be discussion of NetRexx issues and topics on the RexxLA members forum, so anyone who is deeply invested in NetRexx may find it advantageous to be a RexxLA member, but it will not be required.

Who will be doing this discussing?   It seems to me that everyone who is deeply invested in NetRexx is participating in  this  forum.  The RexxLA members I know of are you, David Requena, Rene Jansen and, I assume, MFC.  Are there other people at RexxLA who will participate in decisions about NetRexx's future who are not here?  If so, then since this is for the time being the one and only legitimate venue for NetRexx issues, why are they not here?

To put it more strongly, is there anyone in RexxLA who is not already here who is even  competent  to direct the evolution of NetRexx, especially since strong Java skills and a good deal of NetRexx experience are required.  If that expertise exists in RexxLA it has not manifested itself in any "work products" at their site. 

So, while all this discussion of NetRexx enhancements is entertaining, it carries no more immediate effect than leaning on a bar rail and fulminating on the failures of the current administration and suggesting what the government should do about it.

Our views carry no immediate effect because NetRexx is in limbo.  But if we are NetRexx's real stakeholders, what we decide here is of the greatest importance.  Ideas developed here should be given the highest priority, subject to tecnical limitations.

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Chip Davis <[hidden email]> wrote:

While I enjoy our discussion of NetRexx enhancement, and am not at all shy about asserting my philosophic preferences, I think we all need to recognize one absolute truth:

  It's going to be a while.

NetRexx is not yet open-sourced.  I have absolute confidence that IBM will, in the fullness of time, assign the responsibility for NetRexx to RexxLA.  It may be a delightful Christmas present.  It's not clear _which_ Christmas, but it could be the next one.  (I think Guy Fawkes Day would be nice, just for the symbolism.)  ;-)

RexxLA, because it is not evil, will do everything possible to include anyone who is the least bit interested in contributing to the language at any level.  It is never in its (or NetRexx's) best interest to turn positive contributors away.

The most likely scenario is that the NetRexx development project will be constituted similar to the ooRexx development project: the code will be kept on a public repository like Sourceforge, the members of the team (committers) will chosen meritocratically, and there will be many channels of communication (among committers and users, for bug submission, questions, and of course, suggestions for enhancements.

None of the above will require RexxLA membership.  Of course, there will be discussion of NetRexx issues and topics on the RexxLA members forum, so anyone who is deeply invested in NetRexx may find it advantageous to be a RexxLA member, but it will not be required.

I think I can safely say that there will be quite a bit of work to do, once the transfer is final, before open NetRexx can be released. Furthermore, I expect that the first release will be exactly the same code that we are using now.  It would not be prudent to introduce changes to the language before the first stable release is out there.

So, while all this discussion of NetRexx enhancements is entertaining, it carries no more immediate effect than leaning on a bar rail and fulminating on the failures of the current administration and suggesting what the government should do about it.

However, these discussions are being archived.  I have no doubt that the NetRexx team will find them a valuable resource, so let's keep those good ideas coming.

And if you _really_ think '=+' is a good idea, just wait until the source is available and have your way with it.  :-)

-Chip-
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Aviatrexx]

George,

I should stress that I was speaking _of_ RexxLA, not _for_ RexxLA.  I
am merely an ex-officer and the René is both the President and
Official NetRexx Contact with IBM.  He is the one who is leading this
effort, and he may disagree with some of what I said and will say.
He's quite open to suggestion but it's his responsibility to make it work.

Your questions are reasonable and I will try to answer them to the
best of my knowledge.  When it comes to what _will_ happen, you'll
have to ask René.  You'll note that I posited the "likely scenario"
based on my experience with the ooRexx project and a fair amount of
history with the organization.  Your bookie won't give you any
guarantees either.

With all those caveats, if you are still interested in my opinions,
speculations, and educated guesses, I'll address them in-line below.

-Chip-

On 9/28/10 02:02 George Hovey said:
>     None of the above will require RexxLA membership.  Of course, there
>     will be discussion of NetRexx issues and topics on the RexxLA
>     members forum, so anyone who is deeply invested in NetRexx may find
>     it advantageous to be a RexxLA member, but it will not be required.
>
> Who will be doing this discussing?

Anyone who is interested, of course.

> It seems to me that everyone who is
> deeply invested in NetRexx is participating in  /this  /forum.

True, but given the um, obscure nature of NetRexx for the last few
years, I expect that audience to swell quite a bit when it goes open.

This forum will very likely go away, given that it is currently a
semi-stealth project supported by a faithful keeper of the flame,
using IBM resources.  The bean counters will surely want to ax it as
soon as they find out that NetRexx is no longer an IBM responsibility.

> The
> RexxLA members I know of are you, David Requena, Rene Jansen and, I
> assume, MFC.  Are there other people at RexxLA who will participate in
> decisions about NetRexx's future who are not here?

Quite a few, actually.  There is a great deal of quiet talent in RexxLA.

> If so, then since
> this is for the time being the one and only legitimate venue for NetRexx
> issues, why are they not here?

Perhaps because they are more talented, and thus more busy, than you
or I? ;-)  Or more likely, since NetRexx is not here yet, they choose
not to participate in speculative discussions until there is something
concrete to discuss.

> To put it more strongly, is there anyone in RexxLA who is not already
> here who is even  /competent  /to direct the evolution of NetRexx,
> especially since strong Java skills and a good deal of NetRexx
> experience are required.

I think I would tread lightly here, George.  I know some immensely
talented, thoughtful, and experienced language designers in RexxLA.
One could make a pretty good argument that "strong Java skills" might
even be an impediment to shepherding a language designed avoid the
flaws in Java in order to make it sensible to humans.

> If that expertise exists in RexxLA it has not
> manifested itself in any "work products" at their site.

Never run an all-volunteer organization, have you George?  Cobbler's
children, herding cats, and all that.

> Our views carry no immediate effect because NetRexx is in limbo.

True.  There's not much any of us can do about that.

> But if
> we are NetRexx's real stakeholders, what we decide here is of the
> greatest importance.

We are _some_ of NetRexx's stakeholders.  Shall we not wait until the
rest of the guests arrive before we decide to spike the punch?

Who knows what ideas, viewpoints, and expertise might appear when the
transfer is announced?  As I said, I believe that our discussions here
will prove a useful resource.  To say that they are "of the greatest
importance" sounds egocentrically hyperbolic.

> Ideas developed here should be given the highest
> priority, subject to tecnical limitations.

Why, simply because they were bruited about by three or four fans of
the language with strong opinions?

It sounds to me that your concern is that you will not have a seat at
the table.  NetRexx will be an open source project.  Everyone on the
planet will have a seat at the table.  Remember however, that it is a
meritocracy of ideas.  Being first, or loudest, doesn't count for much.

>
> On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Chip Davis <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     While I enjoy our discussion of NetRexx enhancement, and am not at
>     all shy about asserting my philosophic preferences, I think we all
>     need to recognize one absolute truth:
>
>       It's going to be a while.



_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Robert L Hamilton]

FWIW, Let's go with what Chip just said.

enjoy the Day,

Bob IIABDFI Hamilton

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 6:07 PM, Chip Davis <[hidden email]> wrote:

While I enjoy our discussion of NetRexx enhancement, and am not at all shy about asserting my philosophic preferences, I think we all need to recognize one absolute truth:

  It's going to be a while.

NetRexx is not yet open-sourced.  I have absolute confidence that IBM will, in the fullness of time, assign the responsibility for NetRexx to RexxLA.  It may be a delightful Christmas present.  It's not clear _which_ Christmas, but it could be the next one.  (I think Guy Fawkes Day would be nice, just for the symbolism.)  ;-)

RexxLA, because it is not evil, will do everything possible to include anyone who is the least bit interested in contributing to the language at any level.  It is never in its (or NetRexx's) best interest to turn positive contributors away.

The most likely scenario is that the NetRexx development project will be constituted similar to the ooRexx development project: the code will be kept on a public repository like Sourceforge, the members of the team (committers) will chosen meritocratically, and there will be many channels of communication (among committers and users, for bug submission, questions, and of course, suggestions for enhancements.

None of the above will require RexxLA membership.  Of course, there will be discussion of NetRexx issues and topics on the RexxLA members forum, so anyone who is deeply invested in NetRexx may find it advantageous to be a RexxLA member, but it will not be required.

I think I can safely say that there will be quite a bit of work to do, once the transfer is final, before open NetRexx can be released. Furthermore, I expect that the first release will be exactly the same code that we are using now.  It would not be prudent to introduce changes to the language before the first stable release is out there.

So, while all this discussion of NetRexx enhancements is entertaining, it carries no more immediate effect than leaning on a bar rail and fulminating on the failures of the current administration and suggesting what the government should do about it.

However, these discussions are being archived.  I have no doubt that the NetRexx team will find them a valuable resource, so let's keep those good ideas coming.

And if you _really_ think '=+' is a good idea, just wait until the source is available and have your way with it.  :-)

-Chip-
_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[George Hovey-2]

Chip,

Thanks for your response to my questions.

Well, I certainly wouldn't want to waste the time of "talented, thoughtful, and experienced language designers" (whatever they are -- a quick check of the Washington Post's Tech Jobs suggests a stagnant market for their talents at the moment ) with my half-baked thoughts on NetRexx.

The following made me sit up straight:

One could make a pretty good argument that "strong Java skills" might even be an impediment to shepherding a language designed avoid the flaws in Java in order to make it sensible to humans.

May I hear that argument?  On the face of it, your claim sounds like "Ignorance is Strength".

For my part, I think that the fates of NetRexx and Java are inextricably linked and that this produces a Great and Good Synergy; and that people capable of developing NetRexx must therefore be pretty knowledgeable about Java.  But plainly there are other views.

What would you think of the following proposition:  lets each write an essay loosely based on the theme  "The State of NetRexx Today, and What It Should Become".  Anyone wanting to get their two cents should do so, in fact the more the better.

If there is sufficient response, we could vote for the best one, with the winner's effort being archived for future perusal by any TTELDs so inclined  .

On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:18 AM, Chip Davis <[hidden email]> wrote:

George,

I should stress that I was speaking _of_ RexxLA, not _for_ RexxLA.  I am merely an ex-officer and the René is both the President and Official NetRexx Contact with IBM.  He is the one who is leading this effort, and he may disagree with some of what I said and will say. He's quite open to suggestion but it's his responsibility to make it work.

Your questions are reasonable and I will try to answer them to the best of my knowledge.  When it comes to what _will_ happen, you'll have to ask René.  You'll note that I posited the "likely scenario" based on my experience with the ooRexx project and a fair amount of history with the organization.  Your bookie won't give you any guarantees either.

With all those caveats, if you are still interested in my opinions, speculations, and educated guesses, I'll address them in-line below.

-Chip-

On 9/28/10 02:02 George Hovey said:

   None of the above will require RexxLA membership.  Of course, there
   will be discussion of NetRexx issues and topics on the RexxLA
   members forum, so anyone who is deeply invested in NetRexx may find
   it advantageous to be a RexxLA member, but it will not be required.

Who will be doing this discussing?

Anyone who is interested, of course.

It seems to me that everyone who is deeply invested in NetRexx is participating in  /this  /forum.

True, but given the um, obscure nature of NetRexx for the last few years, I expect that audience to swell quite a bit when it goes open.

This forum will very likely go away, given that it is currently a semi-stealth project supported by a faithful keeper of the flame, using IBM resources.  The bean counters will surely want to ax it as soon as they find out that NetRexx is no longer an IBM responsibility.

The RexxLA members I know of are you, David Requena, Rene Jansen and, I assume, MFC.  Are there other people at RexxLA who will participate in decisions about NetRexx's future who are not here?

Quite a few, actually.  There is a great deal of quiet talent in RexxLA.

If so, then since this is for the time being the one and only legitimate venue for NetRexx issues, why are they not here?

Perhaps because they are more talented, and thus more busy, than you or I? ;-)  Or more likely, since NetRexx is not here yet, they choose not to participate in speculative discussions until there is something concrete to discuss.

To put it more strongly, is there anyone in RexxLA who is not already here who is even  /competent  /to direct the evolution of NetRexx, especially since strong Java skills and a good deal of NetRexx experience are required.

I think I would tread lightly here, George.  I know some immensely talented, thoughtful, and experienced language designers in RexxLA. One could make a pretty good argument that "strong Java skills" might even be an impediment to shepherding a language designed avoid the flaws in Java in order to make it sensible to humans.

If that expertise exists in RexxLA it has not manifested itself in any "work products" at their site.

Never run an all-volunteer organization, have you George?  Cobbler's children, herding cats, and all that.

Our views carry no immediate effect because NetRexx is in limbo.

True.  There's not much any of us can do about that.

But if we are NetRexx's real stakeholders, what we decide here is of the greatest importance.

We are _some_ of NetRexx's stakeholders.  Shall we not wait until the rest of the guests arrive before we decide to spike the punch?

Who knows what ideas, viewpoints, and expertise might appear when the transfer is announced?  As I said, I believe that our discussions here will prove a useful resource.  To say that they are "of the greatest importance" sounds egocentrically hyperbolic.

Ideas developed here should be given the highest priority, subject to tecnical limitations.

Why, simply because they were bruited about by three or four fans of the language with strong opinions?

It sounds to me that your concern is that you will not have a seat at the table.  NetRexx will be an open source project.  Everyone on the planet will have a seat at the table.  Remember however, that it is a meritocracy of ideas.  Being first, or loudest, doesn't count for much.

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:07 PM, Chip Davis <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:

   While I enjoy our discussion of NetRexx enhancement, and am not at
   all shy about asserting my philosophic preferences, I think we all
   need to recognize one absolute truth:

     It's going to be a while.

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Aviatrexx]

Hi George,

I don't have time to respond as completely as I would like to your
points, so I hope a brief reply will suffice for now.  I doubt that
this topic is going to fade away. :-)

Brief responses are in-line:

On 9/29/10 19:03 George Hovey said:
> Well, I certainly wouldn't want to waste the time of "talented,
> thoughtful, and experienced language designers" (whatever they are -- a
> quick check of the Washington Post's Tech Jobs suggests a stagnant
> market for their talents at the moment ) with my half-baked thoughts on
> NetRexx.

When I was a member of the committee writing the ANSI Standard for
Rexx, I worked with quite a few TTELDs, many of whom are still members
of RexxLA.  With only one exception (the author of ARexx, Rexx for the
Amiga) we know where to find them if we should want their input.

Sadly, as much as I prefer newspapers for my current events, they are
about the last place you will find want-ads for TTELDs.  I won't
address your «soi-disant» characterization of your thoughts.

> The following made me sit up straight:

Always glad to encourage good posture. ;-)

>> One could make a pretty good argument that "strong Java skills" might
>> even be an impediment to shepherding a language designed avoid the flaws
>> in Java in order to make it sensible to humans.
>
> May I hear that argument?  On the face of it, your claim sounds like
> "Ignorance is Strength".

"When your only tool is a hammer, all your problems look like nails."

Those who are adept at C++/Java will invariably resort to that way of
solving problems.  Another manifestation of this phenomenon is the way
you can tell a non-native speaker: they will try to directly translate
idioms of their native language into the new one.  They think in terms
of those idioms and naturally try to force them onto the new language,
instead of using an equivalent native idiom.

There are a couple of ways this is manifest in NetRexx:
  1. NetRexx, as a language, was designed to replace
Java-the-Language.  Not Java-the-Platform or Java-the-Class-Libraries,
both of which NetRexx uses seamlessly. (No small feat, that.)
  2. NetRexx was designed to be as approachable, sensible, and
painless as possible to use by non-C++ programmers, or even
non-programmers.  (That's no small feat, either.)
  3. Java-the-language was designed by TTELDs who had long ago drunk
the C++ Kool-Aid.  Philosophically, it is an anti-Rexx language.

> For my part, I think that the fates of NetRexx and Java are inextricably
> linked and that this produces a Great and Good Synergy; and that people
> capable of developing NetRexx must therefore be pretty knowledgeable
> about Java.  But plainly there are other views.

You insist on conflating Java-the-Language with Java-the-Environment.
  Obviously, there is not much useful that NetRexx could accomplish
without a fairly extensive knowledge of the Java class libraries and
other features of the Java platform.

Fortunately, the class libraries have a well-defined interface with
which NetRexx can work.  That means that a class can be considered a
black-box and none of the icky Java internal mechanisms need to be
understood to use it.

> What would you think of the following proposition:  lets each write an
> essay loosely based on the theme  "The State of NetRexx Today, and What
> It Should Become".  Anyone wanting to get their two cents should do so,
> in fact the more the better.

Sounds like a good idea for René's netrexx.com site.  But I will
insist that all contributors read, understand, and accept Part 1 of
_The_NetRexx_Language_ first.  Think of it as the Citizenship Pledge a
foreign national has to take before we let them have a say in how the
country runs.

-Chip-


_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[George Hovey-2]

Chip,
First, sorry to scoff at TTELDs; just a tasteless joke.  That said, if you look at the languages that keep popping up at such a furious rate, most have the germ of a useful idea embedded in a slapped-together framework.  Presumably they are produced by at least LDs, if not full-scale TTELDs, so I'm not inclined to be in awe of them.  But I can see that TTELDs  might answer to a higher standard.

I'm unprepared to respond fully because there are some parts I don't understand.

• "Those who are adept at C++/Java will invariably resort to that way of solving problems."  AFAIK, all they have in common is the OO paradigm.  Is this what you mean and, if so, do you know of an alternative?
• "Java-the-language... Philosophically, it is an anti-[Net?]Rexx language."  Don't know what this means or why it matters.  Since NetRexx so successfully insulates us of from Java, do we care what Java thinks of NetRexx?
  
• "There are a couple of ways this is manifest in NetRexx".  You seem to approve of items 1 and 2; what don't you approve?
  
• "You insist on conflating Java-the-Language with Java-the-Environment."  Didn't know I was doing that; what's it mean?

Re "Java-the-language was designed by TTELDs who had long ago drunk the C++ Kool-Aid."
My understanding is that Java was designed by people who vehemently rejected C++ constructs like preprocessors, destructors, and operator overloading in order to make Java simple and safe.  They succeeded spectacularly, though not perfectly.  But get it from the horse's mouth:   http://download.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/getStarted/intro/definition.html

Re  "Sounds like a good idea for René's netrexx.com site."  Didn't know about this; summoned it up with some excitement, but couldn't see anything about NetRexx, except its misspelled name.

Re  "But I will insist that all contributors read, understand, and accept Part 1 of _The_NetRexx_Language_ first.  Think of it as the Citizenship Pledge a foreign national has to take before we let them have a say in how the country runs."    [He means the U.S.]  Sounds like a loyalty oath.  Having lived through the McCarthy madness, this makes me queasy.  Perhaps we should keep the discussion here where there are no preconditions on what we may think or say.

On Wed, Sep 29, 2010 at 7:14 PM, Chip Davis <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi George,

I don't have time to respond as completely as I would like to your points, so I hope a brief reply will suffice for now.  I doubt that this topic is going to fade away. :-)

Brief responses are in-line:

On 9/29/10 19:03 George Hovey said:

Well, I certainly wouldn't want to waste the time of "talented, thoughtful, and experienced language designers" (whatever they are -- a quick check of the Washington Post's Tech Jobs suggests a stagnant market for their talents at the moment ) with my half-baked thoughts on NetRexx.

When I was a member of the committee writing the ANSI Standard for Rexx, I worked with quite a few TTELDs, many of whom are still members of RexxLA.  With only one exception (the author of ARexx, Rexx for the Amiga) we know where to find them if we should want their input.

Sadly, as much as I prefer newspapers for my current events, they are about the last place you will find want-ads for TTELDs.  I won't address your «soi-disant» characterization of your thoughts.

The following made me sit up straight:

Always glad to encourage good posture. ;-)

One could make a pretty good argument that "strong Java skills" might even be an impediment to shepherding a language designed avoid the flaws in Java in order to make it sensible to humans.

May I hear that argument?  On the face of it, your claim sounds like "Ignorance is Strength".

"When your only tool is a hammer, all your problems look like nails."

Those who are adept at C++/Java will invariably resort to that way of solving problems.  Another manifestation of this phenomenon is the way you can tell a non-native speaker: they will try to directly translate idioms of their native language into the new one.  They think in terms of those idioms and naturally try to force them onto the new language, instead of using an equivalent native idiom.

There are a couple of ways this is manifest in NetRexx:
 1. NetRexx, as a language, was designed to replace Java-the-Language.  Not Java-the-Platform or Java-the-Class-Libraries, both of which NetRexx uses seamlessly. (No small feat, that.)
 2. NetRexx was designed to be as approachable, sensible, and painless as possible to use by non-C++ programmers, or even non-programmers.  (That's no small feat, either.)
 3. Java-the-language was designed by TTELDs who had long ago drunk the C++ Kool-Aid.  Philosophically, it is an anti-Rexx language.

For my part, I think that the fates of NetRexx and Java are inextricably linked and that this produces a Great and Good Synergy; and that people capable of developing NetRexx must therefore be pretty knowledgeable about Java.  But plainly there are other views.

You insist on conflating Java-the-Language with Java-the-Environment.  Obviously, there is not much useful that NetRexx could accomplish without a fairly extensive knowledge of the Java class libraries and other features of the Java platform.

Fortunately, the class libraries have a well-defined interface with which NetRexx can work.  That means that a class can be considered a black-box and none of the icky Java internal mechanisms need to be understood to use it.

What would you think of the following proposition:  lets each write an essay loosely based on the theme  "The State of NetRexx Today, and What It Should Become".  Anyone wanting to get their two cents should do so, in fact the more the better.

Sounds like a good idea for René's netrexx.com site.  But I will insist that all contributors read, understand, and accept Part 1 of _The_NetRexx_Language_ first.  Think of it as the Citizenship Pledge a foreign national has to take before we let them have a say in how the country runs.

-Chip-

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]

[Thomas.Schneider.Wien]

Hello George & all,

   that's FUNNY. You can BUY www.NetRexx.com

some clever people obviously created this URL with totally unrelated stuff!!!

I think Rene's site will be www.netrexx.org

But I don't know how many people will try www.netrexx.com !! :-(

Somebody should go ahead and ask for the price of www.NetRexx.com, by the way.

Thomas.
============================================================
Am 30.09.2010 21:02, schrieb George Hovey:

Sounds like a good idea for René's netrexx.com site.  But I will insist that all contributors read, understand, and accept Part 1 of

_______________________________________________
Ibm-netrexx mailing list
[hidden email]