RE: RPG IV and CF-spec "keep it IBM"

Buck,

You make some good points but also have a lot of incorrect assumptions.
First RPG pretty much supports the entire set of other programming languages
for the AS/400. Without RPG revenue Toronto might have been closed (my
opinion)on a business decision.

Next, I think the adaptation rate of RPG IV is increasing on an almost
weekly basis. Now that this Y2K distraction is finally dieing down,
companies are spending money on RPG IV training (believe me, I'm pretty
booked this year, whereas last year it was pretty dry).

The issue for me is not fixed vs free-format. It is legacy. RPG IV apps are
fixed format and they usually work. I can go write code in Java or COBOL or
C++ or C if I don't posses the skill to adapt to RPG IV's format, and can
only write pretty code in these free-format languages. I'm not looking for
the end-all here. RPG IV simply not the language of word processors, a cool
Palm Pilot app. It is however, great for general purpose business
applications. Good or bad, RPG IV had fixed format, so my RPGII and RPG III
code will be there for another 20 years. I need to be able to support those
applications.

I would go so far as to say it is a life-saver for the AS/400. If RPG went
away, a reason to stay on the AS/400 would go away. If I have to rewrite my
applications because their programming language goes away, I might was well
give my uses a pretty application interface even if it doesn't work, because
they only care if it looks good, not if it runs every time.

There are three compelling reasons to use the AS/400.
The reliability
The database
The RPG language

There is way too much competition out there. Oracle (a crappy database)
Windows NT (a crappy OS) and C++/Java (a complex group of languages).
End-users don't give a rats butt if you write in Swahili or RPG, the want
the pretty pictures, mostly.


Bob Cozzi

http://www.RPGIV.com




> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-rpg400-l@midrange.com [mailto:owner-rpg400-l@midrange.com]On
> Behalf Of Buck Calabro
> Sent: Monday, August 02, 1999 8:57 AM
> To: 'RPG400-L@midrange.com'
> Subject: RE: RPG IV and CF-spec "keep it IBM"
>
>
> Doug,
>
> >>I am having a difficult time understanding the argument that "it's
> >>no longer RPG."
> >
> >I never said that.
>
> No, but other folks seem to be.  I value your opinion greatly,
> and apologise
> if I jumbled up several posts into a single response.  The kicker is that
> there seem to be two distinct "camps" when it comes to RPG IV/ILE: The
> "Don't touch RPG - it's already perfect" group, and the "Why
> don't you ever
> go far enough to make it a real language?" group.  Taking the
> middle ground
> doesn't really make anybody happy, alas.
>
> >>   As far as I'm
> >>    concerned, Toronto should have made RPG IV
> >>    incompatible with RPG/400.
> >
> >I have to disagree with you here.  Getting people to try RPG IV seems
> >hard enough when you can convert it easily.  If existing code couldn't
> >coexist nicely with RPG IV and if there was any incompatability when
> >converting legacy code, it would be a harder sell to convince mgmt.
>
> Controversial stance?  Sure!  Hindsight sure is working well for me today,
> but look at the adoption rate of the "hybrid" RPG IV.  The fact that it is
> compatible with RPG/400 has not improved the adoption rate any.  Why?  I
> can't honestly say, but I suspect it's because the vast majority
> or midrange
> programmers are afraid that they won't be able to understand it.
> Mind you,
> I completely understand that they haven't even *looked* at it,
> but that only
> adds weight to my theory.
>
> In this kind of situation, where basically the only adopters are those who
> are already comfortable with C-like functions, I think that the language
> would have been much improved even over it's current state if Toronto had
> been given the green light to make it a new language.
>
> My main reason for saying this is legacy code.  When we re-wrote our
> interactive applications moving from S/3 to S/38, we were able to
> update the
> code AND the logic.  We had a clean(er) slate to work from.  The converted
> batch stuff has the old crummy code and the old crummy logic.  And then we
> CVTRPGSRC and have old crummy RPG IV code the moment it is born.
> Compatibility hasn't helped - it's hindered progress!
>
> If it were really a new language, then IBM would have to make a truly
> convincing argument to sell it.  Let's face it, Toronto is doing an awful
> lot of work for precious little return.  If it were a cost centre, then it
> would live or die on it's merit.  As it appears now, it would apparently
> die, in which case the advanced shops would probably switch to C and
> re-write anyway.
>
> Buck Calabro
> +---
> | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
> | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
> | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
> | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
> | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator:
> david@midrange.com
> +---END
>
>

+---
| This is the RPG/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---END