RE: MAIN and LR

We can't get anyone on this machine to use ILE/RPG. How the hell are
you going to get them use PL/I?

I think ILE/RPG is a superb language or at least for a structured
language.

On Tue, Sep 25, 2012 at 11:32 AM, James Lampert
<jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Alan Campin wrote:

The MAIN says do not bind the RPG cycle. You could not use an IP

with

a Main program because it does not have an RPG cycle. IF is under
your control and is valid in a MAIN program.

The MAIN keyword is just acknowledging a reality that has been true
for 20 years. 99.9% of the programs that we write do not use the
cycle so why add the overhead to a program to run it when we don't

use it.

To which I've always responded (if not necessarily in such a
conciliatory manner), "If you're not writing a Cycle program
(conventional or unconventional), then is RPG necessarily the best
language for the job?"

Sometimes it is; sometimes it isn't. Sometimes it's just the only
language available. And why bother with all this "/free" bovine scat
to make RPG look like PL/I, when it would have made more sense to
upgrade the PL/I compiler from a crude OPM subset PRPQ to a full
ILE-based implementation with full access to bound calls,

STDIN/STDOUT, and so forth?

--
JHHL
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i (RPG400-L)

mailing

list To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe,
unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx Before posting, please take a
moment to review the archives at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.

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