Re: Using % type functions/using RPG IV

RIGHT ON ! Buck ....

Gone are the days of 029 / 129 & 3741 & 3742 & 1409
On IBM boxes, RPG has been implemented on 5280, S/3, 34, 36, 38 & 400 with
variety of flavor...& Older big boys  360/370 etc..
Things have progressed with the time, people have to accommodate the
comings...
Structured and modularization of the codes always produces benefits on long
run.
Management ought to think far and not short...Management that does not
support and encourage progress
is snoozing on the job.....and the bottom line.....

I hated "C" in the past....then to me, it was low level code....Now I enjoy
coding in "C" too...

Regards...

Vasant




-----Original Message-----
From: Buck Calabro <buck.calabro@aptissoftware.com>
To: RPG400-L@midrange.com <RPG400-L@midrange.com>
Date: Friday, February 04, 2000 5:11 PM
Subject: RE: Using % type functions/using RPG IV


>Carl wrote:
>
>>As a follow up to Hans' comments: moving to RPG IV is a
>>fairly major change for most companies when you consider
>>the learning  curve on the language improvements plus the
>>procedures, prototypes, ILE, etc., etc, etc..  Some of
>>this stuff has been around for years but there's a lot of
>>old RPG still out there!  Why?
>
>I have very strong feelings on this point.  It is a calumny for anyone to
>repeat the phrase "consider the learning  curve on the language
>improvements."  (Yes, I know there's more but I want to hit this one
first!)
>
>Improvement Learning curve
>Longer variable names 0 seconds
>Mixed case names 0 seconds
>32k strings 0 seconds
>32k array elements 0 seconds
>10 character file names 0 seconds
>White space! 0 seconds
>
>If your management objects to the learning curve for prototyped procedures
>and ILE, then DON'T USE THEM.  There are more than enough benefits to using
>RPG IV simply for the lessened restrictions and mixed case, longer field
>names.
>
>Why has the old RPG stayed out there?  I might answer by saying "inertia"
>but I think that may be only part of the reason.  Almost everybody I know
>learnt RPG by copying existing code.  Even if they knew RPG before coming
to
>their current job, they work on the applications by _copying existing code_
>If the code they use is...elderly, then the code they create will be no
>better.
>
>By the way, I learnt to use subprocedures in about an hour.  I am a badly
>educated, no-degree computer operator cum programmer.  I started with
cards,
>the cycle and MR.  If I can learn subprocedures, quite literally ANYBODY
>can.  Think of them as baby programs; more self-contained than subroutines.
>It helps.
>
>Buck
>+---
>| 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
>+---
>

+---
| 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
+---