RE: Free format H, F, D and P specs

You seem to be shooting your own argument in the foot. You ask for IBM
to spend more money by splitting the compiler, and then say that for
your "primary job" you wouldn't be able to use it anyway! If you have
one compiler for the new stuff and one that you can only use on the old
stuff then that limits your options. (I was trying to agree with you,
Jon, although I may have worded it clumsily). With the current ability
to "sneak" new code into existing programs when doing maintenance, we
have the best of both worlds. And my experience is very different from
yours in that almost all the RPG programmers I work with know how to use
the "new stuff" and would have some explaining to do to their managers
if the were tasked with maintaining a program and admitted they didn't
understand the code.

Trevor Briggs
Analyst/Programmer
Lincare, Inc.
(727) 431-1246
TBriggs2@xxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Alan Campin
Sent: Monday, October 07, 2013 8:38 PM
To: RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)
Subject: Re: Free format H, F, D and P specs

I see what you mean by the work on the release.

As to the 50/50. For the last almost 15 years years I have asked
programmers if they are RPG ILE programmers and they always say yes so I
ask so you use built-in functions, What that?, procedures, no or the
more
common answer what's that. You use modules, no or the more common answer
what's that, You use service programs, no or again the most common
answer,
what's that, You use free format, no.

I looked for two years for another job because my previous company was
dumping the iSeries to go to a thick client package system written
mostly
in VB3 (I know, makes a lot of sense) but try to find a company that
would
allow you to use modern programming. Almost impossible. My new company
is
allowing me to write new code in ILE but my primary job is to maintain
RPG
III converted to RPG IV or programs written in RPG III with the RPG IV
compiler. I know they are out there somewhere but I sure haven't found
them.

Correction, I did find one, a job that I was perfect for but the manager
refused to hire me because she hated fat guys and I wasn't even that
heavy
then. Oh, well. That how it goes.


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

On 2013-10-07, at 7:41 PM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<< Even if they froze it there would be a cost - one more compiler

to

keep

up-to-date with the system changes. A new release is not a no-op on

the

compilers even if there are no new features added.>>

I don't quite understand that. All the more modern compilers

generate

Z-Code. Z-Code is what gets compiled to machine code. Any new

language

is

still going to generate Z-Code.

Actually W-code but the effect is the same.

You seem to assume that compilers are like application programs and

just

keep going no matter what the OS does but that isn't the case. In the

case

of the OPM compilers I suspect that there is very little work to do

with

each release other than test - which can be pretty big all by itself.

But

with the current compilers there would almost certainly be work for

every

release even if no features are added. Suppose a new data type gets

added

to the database. RPG has to do something with it even if it is to

ignore it

and/or refuse to process files that use the feature. Same thing with
display files, printer files, etc. All of the information that goes

into

the PSDS (for example) is retrieved with API calls - what if the

format

changes - and sometimes the internal interfaces do change even if the
"public" version doesn't. What if the JNI interface changes - the

compiler

may have to adapt to generate to a new format. Sometimes changes in

things

like security can affect the compiler. In my day we often spent days
checking just to be certain that planned changes were not going to

require

us to make code changes. In many cases these days much of this is

taken

care of by the fact that the RPG runtime is all in service programs

and not

hard generated into each program as much of it was for OPM. As a

result it

is less of a problem than it was when I was working on the compilers

but it

is not a no-op.

Removing capability is also much more complex than simply commenting

out a

few lines. The additional testing that would be required of the new
compiler would be massive. There's a reason that there was a big test

team

when RPG IV was launched - they expended enormous amounts of resource

to

make sure it still worked the me way - this would be no different.

<< If they get no additional revenue what's the benefit to IBM? -

other

than keeping you and me happy which I'm sure is high on their

must-do

list

<grin> >>
I would agree with that but then why are they putting all this new

stuff

into the RPG IV except to keep us happy? It sure isn't for the 90%

writing

RPG III in RPG IV. They could care less.

They are keeping the language alive by continuing to enhance it. But

that

doesn't mean they want to add an extra two compilers (current and prev

for

the present RPG IV) that they have to maintain and test each release.

You are way over stating it at 90% in my opinion. I'd say closer to

50/50

but it is irrelevant.

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

We'll have to agree to disagree Alan.

Even if they froze it there would be a cost - one more compiler to

keep

up-to-date with the system changes. A new release is not a no-op on

the

compilers even if there are no new features added.

If they get no additional revenue what's the benefit to IBM? -

other

than

keeping you and me happy which I'm sure is high on their must-do

list

<grin>

On 2013-10-07, at 5:48 PM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jon, they have frozen PDM. Why wouldn't they freeze RPG IV?.Other

than

bug

fixes what would they need to do to it? It would be dead and how

much

are

they paying to maintain compatibility with every release of RPG

going

back

to the System 38, release one?

Hell, it would probably hardly ever be used anyway. Every company

I

have

worked at everyone is writing RPG III in RPG IV. No one uses free

format

or

built in function or procedures or much of anything. I introduce

it but

most people want nothing to do with it. RPG III was fine 20 years

ago.

Its

fine today.

I am finding recent programs written with from and to positions in

data

structures? How many years have we had the ability to define data
structures using just the type and size. Almost twenty? Almost

every

program I see people are still using 6 character variable names

for

fields,

even in files.

Bottom line is a very very small subset will use the new features.

The

rest

will continue to write RPG III.


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Jon Paris

<jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

Simple question to ask yourself Alan - how much would you pay for

it?

Your requirement would all but double IBM's maintenance

requirements

and

thereby costs. Where do the $ come from?


On 2013-10-07, at 2:28 PM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

The following is my opinion only.

What I don't like about the announcement is that it is in the

same

language, RPG IV. I think IBM should have come out with a new

version

of

RPG, RPG V or maybe RPGM for RPG Modern with all the free form

syntax.

No

support for fixed format at all and all the old garbage out of

the

language. A clean spec. A modern compiler built for

multi-treading.

If

you

want to write modern go with the new language. Maintaining old

stuff.

Use

RPG IV or RPG III.


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Luis Rodriguez

<luisro58@xxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Jon Paris

<jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

wrote:

on

Agree 100%. What I like most of the new syntax is that the

/FREE

/END-FREE

combo won't be needed anymore. Nice!! Now, if I only could make

management

agree on a new IBM i :-(

On the other hand, maybe the "hype" before the real

announcement

was a

little too much. I was hoping something with more "substance".

Maybe

some

new BIFs or something like that...

Regards,

Luis Rodriguez
IBM Certified Systems Expert - eServer i5 iSeries
--
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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 (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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.

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com




--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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 (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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.

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com




--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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 (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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.

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com




--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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.