× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.



Steve Richter wrote:
On 2/24/08, Mark S. Waterbury <mark.s.waterbury@xxxxxxx> wrote:
having two names for fields and files is arguably worse than a single
name. short names are a problem for programmers.
I'm not as conversant regarding TIMI, etc., that apparently you and Mark are.
But I do wonder why short names are a problem for programmers. From the System/3 through the System/36 we only had six [6] positions for field names (eight [8] for files and other objects). Never created a problem for me (perhaps I'm just more versatile).

Eons ago (it seems) I also wrote COBOL, in which, if I recall correctly, one could have thirty-five [35] character field names. Most COBOL programmers, being as lazy as RPG programmers and also suffering from writers cramp, rarely went over twelve [12] character field names.


I'll leave it to Mark, et al, to address your other points, but this one is bogus (aka "BS").



* Jerry C. Adams
*IBM System i Programmer/Analyst
B&W Wholesale Distributors, Inc.* *
voice
615.995.7024
fax
615.995.1201
email
jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <mailto:jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>





As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.