|
OK Don - I'll bite. >Reasons not using RPG IV include: >No business reason to do the conversion. I'm constantly hearing about the RPG programmer shortage. I would have thought that a language that has a minimal to non-existent learning curve but brings significant productivity increases is reason enough. I would say it's hard to find a business reason _not_ to do the conversion. Also in this category, you're locking yourself out of almost everything new on the system - IBM are not going to go on building CALL type APIs. Many people on this list complain about IBM lack of marketing etc. (and I agree with that) but sometimes I wonder if this "it ain't broke so don't touch it" attitude also contributes to the view of the box as "old fashioned" (my turn to run and duck now <grin>) >Why all the extra DASD to do the same thing I'm doing now? By taking the option to compress observability I can finish up with lower DASD usage. Even without that you have to have a lot of programs to use up a significant amount of space. Again the trade off is productivity against hardware. DASD is a hell of a lot cheaper than the hourly cost of your brain. >Why all the extra hardware to do the same thing I'm doing now? (Based on >extra memory/cpu needed to push these new puppies) This varies and I've yet to meet anyone who thought that the increase was not worth the effort. Admittedly this depends on your hardware - it's more likely to present a problem on CISC than RISC. However, if this was the only criteria, everyone would still be using DOS or Win 3.1 >Why the extra learning curve to do what I have now and what works now? What learning curve ? Absolute outside it is 4 to 5 days to use the compiler in compatibility mode. Note that I'm not advocating that everyone switch to full ILE etc. - but every journey starts with a single step. >And, you'll see that alot of this also applies to your JAVA question... Here I really have to strongly disagree with you. We're talking about a situation where there is no conversion available (and you probably wouldn't want it anyway since we're talking about OO versus procedural) compared with a simple command that does it for you. We're talking about the difference in learning curve of 5 days (I'm being generous) versus 3 to 6 months. I fully understand that a switch to Java does indeed need a real good reason. Also other RPG programmers will undoubtedly be able to read your RPG IV even if they haven't been "converted". They wouldn't be able to read your Java. Sorry but this is a "chalk and cheese" comparison. +--- | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-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 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.