The JIT scheme worked well for future-proofing for decades. That means it&#x27;s an approach others should consider emulating if they&#x27;re not yet. Only thing I couldn&#x27;t figure out, due to IBM terminology, is if the compiled output is actual microcode or just CPU instructions. Or if they both create a optimized, microcode implementation and a JIT to move things to it.<p>Integrating DB-like functionality into the system was ahead of time. The original, System&#x2F;38, had capability security in the hardware enforcing an object-based view of memory with permissible operations on different types of objects: processes, I&#x2F;O, arrays, stacks, and so on. The security implications of that means I&#x27;d recommend one to a business in a heartbeat if they hadn&#x27;t ditched that for POWER.<p><a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;homes.cs.washington.edu&#x2F;~levy&#x2F;capabook&#x2F;Chapter8.pdf" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;homes.cs.washington.edu&#x2F;~levy&#x2F;capabook&#x2F;Chapter8.pdf</a><p>All in all, System&#x2F;38 was a very, forward-thinking and practical design that continues to prove itself year after year. If it doesn&#x27;t exist, I&#x27;d like to see a Lesson&#x27;s Learned report on that project and how the team decided what would be in it.