Re: IBM getting rid of RPG

Joe,

What do you do about

     cmd prompting

    any ibm cmd like WrkSplf, WrkSbmJob, esp WrkOutq and WrkWtr

    Receiving a break message

    Exception handling - rpg or cl pgm hits an unmonitored exception msg.
The ibm default exception handler takes over and wants to prompt for Cancel,
dump or ignore

I like your concept, but in practice these situations have to be dealt with,
No?

Steve Richter

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Pluta <joepluta@PlutaBrothers.com>
To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com <MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com>
Date: Saturday, July 28, 2001 1:55 PM
Subject: RE: IBM getting rid of RPG


>There are ways around the interactive tax.  In fact, I'll be doing a
seminar
>on exactly that topic at COMMON.  The basic idea is to modify your programs
>to run in batch and talk to a data queue instead of a display file.  Once
>you do that, you can pretty quickly attach a user interface, either thick
>client or thin.  A thick client can be written in VB or Java, or you can
use
>a servlet engine such as WebSphere or Tomcat to run your applications via a
>browser.  It's fast, powerful, flexible and relatively painless.
>
>This way, your primary business logic is still written in RPG, which I
>contend is the best language for defining business rules in the business,
>primarily because of its tight integration with the database.  And, once
>you've started separating your business logic from your presentation, you
>can start looking at moving towards a true client/server architecture,
which
>is where I believe the iSeries will truly outpace any other platform.
>
>Joe
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: owner-midrange-l@midrange.com
>> [mailto:owner-midrange-l@midrange.com]On Behalf Of William A Pack
>> Sent: Saturday, July 28, 2001 11:09 AM
>> To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
>> Subject: IBM getting rid of RPG
>>
>>
>> I liked Mr. Rockwell's comments.  IBM is trying everything
>> to get people to
>> abandon current applications and migrate to something they want to sell,
>> like Java or Domino.  They are good alternatives for new apps,
>> but if I have
>> a business running for 5-10 years on good software, why should I
>> change just
>> because IBM wants me to?  IBM is going to piss off quite a few customers,
>> who will remember the favor that IBM did them by jacking up the cost of
>> interactive workload.  If they have to change applications, my
>> guess is they
>> will be implemented on a cluster of Wintel boxes, just to return the
favor
>> to IBM.  I really want to now the technical reasons IBM has for costing
on
>> interactive features.  They claim it is harder to do 5250 now that 3
years
>> ago.  Why?
>> The System 3/x family was sold as a programmerless systems.
>>  The AS/400 was
>> sold as a system that will maintain investment in applications
>> and business
>> practices.  Now, the only thing that sets the 400 apart from the sea of
>> Intel based clones is the single manufacturer.   Looks like the future
>> belongs to Wintel and C#.
>
>+---
>| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
>| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
>| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@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 is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@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
+---