> I would also add that I don't think that an RPG certification that did not
> include RPG IV would be worthwhile.  Even if the programmer will not be 
> RPG IV in his daily life, I'd still want the certification to demonstrate that
> they had educated themselves beyond the current job requirements.


I see and agree with your point....I also see soooo many shops that are
understaffed and overloaded (Y2K, etc) in which the mgmt has made a
decision not to go to RPG/IV at this time for any one of several reasons
(time, DASD, performance on cisc, learning curve,....) in spite of great
sessions on RPG IV such as your guided tour, Cozi's D specs, etc., et al.
And that presumes that these programmers have had the luxury that alot of
us take for granted of being able to go to such seminars.  Heck, I know of
alot of shops here in DC metro that flat out WON'T send their people to
even the freebies downtown...they're management just has no concept of
reality when it comes to keeping current for fear of losing the
programming staff...a interesting catch-22.

Frankly in 2 years or so, this will be a moot point as alot of the current
crunch will have been replaced with a newer crunch, more vendors (the REAL
driving force in my book) are writing RPG IV based packages, and the
industry as a whole will be "inticed" to move on up the ladder...
At that time, the test will then more accurately reflect the industry and
the industry can rely on the test...  And, hopefully it will do so more
than it has relied on the stuff being cranked out by the ICCCP folks that
brought you the CDP, CSP, etc?

| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com

This thread ...


Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page