× 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.


  • Subject: Re: Using % type functions/using RPG IV
  • From: Jim Langston <jlangston@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2000 08:13:31 -0800
  • Organization: Conex Global Logistics Services, Inc.



Dave Mahadevan wrote:

> Carl:
>
> Carl Pitcher wrote:
>
> > >My final word on this beaten-to-death topic:
> > 1. buyer beware - if it's RPGIII, don't even consider it.
>
> Not really true.  Many shops still use RPG/36 and are still in business.  I 
>love
> RPG IV but that is just me.

RPG IV/ILE has been out long enough that vendors should be using it.
If they are not using it they are way behind the times.  We are considering
a package written in RPG III, but it is being converted to RPG IV and
large sections of it are totally RPG IV.  I haven't gotten into the nuts and
bolts yet to determine if it's actually using ILE yet.  If they didn't have any
IV it wouldn't be considered.

> > 2. buyer beware - if it's RPGIV and doesn't use true date data types, don't
> > even consider it.
>
> Pardon my language.  Poppycock.  You can still use 8 digit numeric dates and
> achieve everything.  Date data types can still be used in intermediate
> calculations and you still can have zero dates and whatever in your numeric 
>date
> fields.  It is important to remember there is no one solution to any problem 
>but
> just variations.

IBM gave us a date variable to use.  Most languages and OSes have date
variables.  They become a standard.  In theory, if you are using date variables
and another package is using date variables, you can swap data pretty
easily.  But, when you aren't, you have to now convert dates to go from
one to the other.  Take our horribly home grown package.  I have dates
stored in MMDDYY format, YYMMDD format, MMDDYYCC format
and CCYYMMDD format.  Trying to write a simple query is a pain in the
neck.  If I want to date compare something in MMDDYY format I have
to do the DIGITS... SUBST routine.  If they were dates, wouldn't be a
problem.

You don't only want to consider the package itself, but things the package
must interface with.

Regards,

Jim Langston


+---
| 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
+---


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.