4 ms·
It’s still unmatched for seamless language interoperability. vMotion is a sort of crude version of VMS live process migration between nodes. The security mode
by goatinaboat 7y ago
It’s still unmatched for seamless language interoperability.
vMotion is a sort of crude version of VMS live process migration between nodes.
The security model is very well thought out, beats rwxrwxrwx and setuid hands down. Versioning filesystem, and RMS means the filesystem is a simple database too.
DCL seems weird but all the commands work the same way, take the same arguments and so on. You can guess with a very high chance of being right. And if you can’t the help/error message is actually useful.
Rock solid stability. Generally very easy to manage, one sysadmin can do a lot.
- pjmlp 7y agoEven when comparing against IBM i and z/OS language environments? What about Windows CLR/COM/UWP? Curious about what you find being unmatched, as I never used VMS, beyond diving into its developer's documentation.
- zvrba 7y ago> It’s still unmatched for seamless language interoperability. I don't know about how it works on VMS, but Microsoft's COM is the only other attempt of language interop I know of. Recently I implemented a COM server, added `IDispatch` to its interfaces and suddenly I could control and test it from Porwershell with no extra effort on my part. Like, magic.
- goatinaboat 7y agoI’ve used COM (and before that CORBA) but these operate at a different level of abstraction. On VMS calling a Pascal function from FORTRAN “just worked” and then you could pass the return value to a C function or BASIC and it was fine. VMS IPC was done via mailboxes, send a message to a person or a program was the same. Which sounds weird to anyone used to the way Unix does mail, but it worked very well. (Yep, VAX BASIC was a serious language used for real, production applications)