RE: CF - One last question

Buck said;
>What happens if you have a distribution application where one of the most
>heavily used database fields is called CHAIN?  Renaming it is a practical
>impossibility, so I guess I just couldn't use the CF-specs for this
>application?  It gets worse - what if I had a database field called
MONITOR.
>Today, MONITOR is not a reserved word, so my CF-specs compile just fine.  

>John's comments are directed toward the idea that the NEXT release may
>introduce a new opcode called MONITOR, and now my program will no longer
>compile because my database is using a newly reserved word.


Thankyou Buck,  
You captured the exact flavor of my comments/concerns.     
As for keywords,  The other languages mentioned "Grew up"  that way,  
We are talking about taking a 90degree turn  in this language 
when we say "Starting tomorrow the following words are keywords".

This CF thing is obviously "Going in",  and   I still think that we don't
know
what the Real impact to our coding will be.  Nor do we know all the 
ramifications that it will have.   

I believe that Barb, George, Hans, will do their best giving us what they
think we 
want/need,  but over the last 10 years I have found,  that sometimes what
they 
think they hear we wanted,   is not what we sometimes think we said.   

I'm just always  cautious about a change this big.   
They only ONE chance to get it right.   
Once it goes in,   IT AIN'T NEVER COMING OUT. 

John Carr
+---
| 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
+---