On Monday, 98/11/30, Rob Basler wrote to David Noon about "OS/2 C++
Programming?" as follows:

RB> DN>WS>  WS> If not does Watcom 10.x or 11.x series compile
OS/2 executables?
RB> DN>WS>  MR> Yes, but the product is no longer being updated.
RB> DN>Mike is wrong here. The 11.0b "patch" was released
only a few months ago.
RB> DN>These patches appear about once a year.
RB> 
RB> The word from Watcom tech support (who I had to beat on for an entire
RB> month to get them to fix a bug in their OS/2 linker) is that the product
RB> is in maintenance mode, there are no new features in development, there
RB> will probably be no more full package updates/patches like 11.0b.

Hi Rob,

Clearly you have never worked for a software tools vendor. The developers at
these places are assigned from one product to another, based on very fluid
development priorities. Sybase probably has the old Watcom developers working
on something that Sybase currently feels is important. It is likely they will
resume work on the Watcom compilers when those are perceived to be important
once more.

This movement of developers from one product to another is totally typical
of ISV's.

However, that is development, not support. The first rule of technical
support is to manage the caller's expectations: give them some line that
prepares them for the support organization being unable to solve their
problem. Why else would a tech. use the expression "in maintenance
mode" when
it is an obvious non sequiter? The term effectively means "it will be
fixed"
when what was intended was "it might not be fixed". Clearly, the phrase was
not coined by anyone thinking through the semantics thoroughly. [Although
that could be said of many catch phrases I've heard from software product
managers.]

Although the "patch" CD contained the full product, the patches were
primarily bug fixes and the amount of change to the code was minimal. This
"patch" approach is not the usual way to introduce significant
new features.

RB> DN>In spite of rumours to the contrary, Watcom C/C++ is still supported, at
RB> DN>least at the 11.x level.
RB> 
RB> As long as you don't mind telling them exactly what lines of code they
RB> have to add to their source to make things work ;-)

Perhaps, but you received your fix. So the product is being supported.

RB> DN>Another nice part about the Watcom compiler is that it can
produce 16-bit
RB> DN>code on the odd occasion that you need it.
RB> 
RB> As well as NT/95 executables (with a linker fix), Win 3.1, Novell NLM's,
RB> DOS apps and more.

Yes, but those are off-topic in this echo. ... :-)

RB> DN>Whether you choose IBM or Watcom you will be using quite a
decent compiler.
RB> DN>I have both installed here and generally prefer Watcom,
largely because of
RB> DN>IBM's memory hog IDE and Watcom's much greater flexibility.
RB> 
RB> I like Watcom.  The IDE is pretty limp, but the compilers are generally
RB> pretty good, and the cross platform support is unparalleled.

The IDE runs the make utility. That's good enough for me. I could do the
same with a REXX script initiated from EPM or LPEX.

Moreover, the VisPro C generator will run WMAKE.EXE on request, so for a GUI
project I don't need the Watcom IDE at all. ... :-)

Regards

Dave


 * KWQ/2 1.2i * Cult (n): A Religion with no Political Power.

--- Maximus/2 3.01