Re: Is this really new ?

[Aaron Bartell <aaronbartell@xxxxxxxxx>]

I believe you do a lot of .NET (correct me if I am wrong) and being that 
you rail on signature violations so much I would love to hear how they 
could be made better (I have my own ideas, but believe they are 
different from yours).  IMO they do serve a purpose and if you do your 
builds and binder language correctly they you should really only ever 
get signature errors when it is important to get one (i.e. like when a 
program that should have been recompiled wasn't).

What does .NET offer in the space of letting you know at runtime that 
something has changed and how does it let you get around it while still 
executing the code?

Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com

Steve Richter wrote:
> I think the wish list has to be divided into two. One list contains
> what only IBM, the owner of the closed source OS, can do. The 2nd is
> what Zend and other software providers can do. Only IBM can expand the
> 10 char object name limit or provide access to ILE procedure
> invocation process ( so that signature violations could be safely
> avoided at runtime, procedure calls could be marshalled across the
> network, etc ).  A 3rd party can write a 5250 client, but only IBM can
> write the server side that the RPG talks to when it reads and writes
> to a display file.  Of course, if the same IBM that profits so well
> from open source Linux would give back an open source IBM i ...
>