RE: Cycle Processing vs. Doing it my way

Let's consider what's difficult: the RPG logic cycle, pointers, matching
record, API's, subfiles (DDS, yeah), subprocedures, embedded SQL?

Ignoring the logic cycle (a major component of the language and an
unquestionable programmer shortcut) seems to be a disservice to the
language.  Every language has some idiosyncrasies; isn't a comprehensive
knowledge of a language a key element in writing "good" programs?  Pointers,
subprocedures, and embedded SQL are common elements of many languages, but
I'm unconvinced homogenized knowledge (where unusual language functions are
ignored) is beneficial.  On the contrary: a knowledge of multiple languages
and language-specific techniques appears to clarify the programmer's thought
process.

Understanding detail Lx and total Lx operations is pretty easy; I can't
believe a programmer capable of dealing with pointers can't handle the
cycle.  Upon hearing any programmer brag of his/her ignorance of the logic
cycle, my first thought would be, "Why don't you learn it?  And what else
don't you know?"

Using pointers promotes program understanding by the maximum number
of...system programmers (ROTFLMAO).  Seeing "CL1" should evoke a gut-level
response:  "We've finished with the L1 group and we're doing something
before starting the next group."  This is readability...if you know the
cycle, of course.  My code is sold and modified by customers, and using the
cycle still is the coin of the realm.

If nothing else, knowledge of multiple techniques keeps analytical skills
sharp.  Of course, so does this NG, if you don't mind getting bloodied!

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-admin@midrange.com [mailto:rpg400-l-admin@midrange.com]On
Behalf Of Jon Paris
Sent: Friday, December 07, 2001 12:24 PM
To: rpg400-l@midrange.com
Subject: Cycle Processing vs. Doing it my way

 >> IMHO, there is nothing inherently evil about using level breaks or
matching record to produce reports.  RPG, after all, -is- Report Program
Generator.

To me the main problem with the cycle etc. is simple.  I want my programs to
be understood by the maximum number of people possible.  Many schools,
books, etc. don't even teach the cycle these days.  Many RPG programmers
don't understand it since they were either never taught it or learnt RPG
after using other languages (COBOL, Basic, whatever) and were already
familiar with coding their own "cycle".

The minute I use the cycle I have automatically eliminate a large group of
programmers from being able to simply grasp the intent and mechanics of my
program.  End of story.  There are other reasons, but this is the biggie in
my book.

Jon Paris
Partner400

_______________________________________________
This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing list
To post a message email: RPG400-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.