Re: What should I say to a *nix community?

Charles

I think we agree violently!!

Getting approval to rewrite existing code in a software house is going to take some convincing - that's where my statement is coming from. I've been given that approval for a part of a product - where I was adding functionality of a considerable scope, so the effort was already there. Even so, there were limits on what I should change.

Regards
Vern

-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Charles Wilt" <charles.wilt@xxxxxxxxx>

Vern,

I'd agree that the ROI of re-writing software that never needs to be
modified is non-existant.

But most software is continually modified, thus there is indeed an ROI
for rewriting to make use of more modern and easier to maintain
techniques.

Imagine the ugliest piece of code you have to work with on a periodic basis....

How much of a headache is that? How many hoops are you willing to
jump through to avoid having to change that legacy code.

Now imagine how much easier it'd be if that code was re-worked...

Charles

On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 7:19 AM, wrote:

Lukas

The ROI on re-writing software that works is very low, if not negative. That

is why it is not done.

So-called progress for its own sake is not progress. Yes, one should learn and

use new techniques and technologies. The investment in technology on the i is
protected - allowing us to focus on applying the new stuff when we can. There is
NO benefit just from right-clicking RPGLE source in WDSC/RDi and converting to
free-form. Almost no measurable benefit, anyhow - how does that help the end
user? Not hardly at all.

I know - you can pick at this point and that - so this discussion is

essentially one without an end. So enough said from this end!

Regards
Vern
-------------- Original message --------------
From: "Lukas Beeler"

On Mon, Aug 25, 2008 at 8:01 PM, James Lampert wrote:

In the 1950s and 1960s, we thought freeways, conversion of urban transit
systems from streetcars to buses, and near-universal automobile
ownership were "progress," and passenger trains -- from the streetcar to
the Sunset Limited -- were "old stuff."

*cough cough*

Running "old stuff unmodified" is a perfect expression of the old
engineer's maxim, "if it ain't broke, don't fix it."

Isn't this the reason why your car industry is dieing? Sticking to
running old 6l engines with a carburetor, instead of going with new,
high pressure, fuel injection, turbocharged for maximum engine
efficiency?

It's easier constantly adopt your software to today, instead of
leaving it 25 years to rot and then finally realize that you'll need
to rewrite it all.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.

--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.