Development, round II

From: Mike Allison <mallison_at_konnections.com>
Date: Wed Jan 28 21:46:08 1998

OS/2 Warp was 386, as I recall. 2.1, I can't remember, 1.2 was 286.
You might need a 386 for the Program Manager, But I don't recall. I
still have copies of 2.1 and 1.2, if you need to know....

-Mike

Philip.Belben_at_powertech.co.uk wrote:
>
> > >REXX on a PC? I think I have heard (very dimly) of this (there was
> > >something called REXX-88 or some such name when I was at IBM) but I
> > >haven't used REXX for years! What does it run on? Will it run on a
> > >Compaq 386? An IBM AT?
> > You can probably find REXX in a lot of places... There's even a shareware
> > version on Macintosh. And if there's an old IBM programming language on a
> > Mac, it's almost definitley on a lot of other platforms. Did REXX start on
> > the IBM mini/mainframes or is it from somewhere else? Has anyone seen a
> > copy of Cobol for Mac? MicroFocus used to make it, but it seems the Cobol
> > crowd has abondoned Macintosh...
>
> Thanks everyone for their help. I shall sometime consider PC-DOS with
> REXX as an environment for my AT or possibly one of my Compaqs... Am I
> right in thinking that OS/2 _won't_ run on an AT?
>
> ORIGINS OF REXX
>
> I met REXX in what I believe to be its native habitat - as the macro
> language for VM/CMS running on an IBM 370 descendant mainframe. It
> replaced a language called EXEC2, whose main distinguishing feature was
> % signs everywhere (although I can't remember what they meant). This in
> turn replaced a language called (you guessed it) EXEC. REXX is/was
> quite a nice language to use, but some features rendered it unsuitable
> for serious programming - numbers, for example, are stored as strings of
> digits in the character code of the machine you are using...
>
> Philip.
Received on Wed Jan 28 1998 - 21:46:08 GMT