RE: RPG IV

["Erickson, Jon" <JonErickson@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I've encountered one small problem with CVTRPGSRC.  It doesn't convert the
INFDS format for the current line number correctly,... e.g.

FFAX025PR  O    E             PRINTER INFDS(LINE)

leaves the format as Binary instead of Integer.

D LINE            DS                  
D  SPLF                  83     92    
D  SPOOL#               123    124B 0 
D  CURLIN               367    368B 0

Should be:
D LINE            DS                  
D  SPLF                  83     92    
D  SPOOL#               123    124I 0 
D  CURLIN               367    368I 0

If left as binary, you'll receive the following when you try to reference
CURLIN,. "MCH1210 - Receiver value to small to hold result".  And yes, it
will compile without errors.

Regards,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jon A. Erickson
Viking Industries, Inc.
 <http://www.vikingindustries.com> http://www.vikingindustries.com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 <<Jon Erickson.vcf>> 


                -----Original Message-----
                From:   Stone, Brad V (TC) [mailto:bvstone@taylorcorp.com]
                Sent:   Tuesday, November 24, 1998 12:32 PM
                To:     'MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com'
                Subject:        RE: RPG IV 

                Step 1.  CVTRPGSRC
                Step 2.  Compile
                Step 3.  Relax

                Bradley V. Stone
                Taylor Corporation - OASIS Programmer/Analyst   
                bvstone@taylorcorp.com


                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: eric [SMTP:eric@norcov.com]
                > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 1:20 PM
                > To:   'MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com'
                > Subject:      RPG IV 
                > 
                > Jon,
                >       You say that the conversion process for gong from
RPG III to RPG IV
                > (not 
                > full-blow ILE) is about 5 days.  What educational
resources did you use to
                > 
                > accomplish this?  Please advise.  Thank you.
                > 
                > Eric Kempter
                > CommAir Mechanical Services, Inc.
                > 
                > 
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: Jon.Paris@halinfo.it [SMTP:Jon.Paris@halinfo.it]
                > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 1998 8:41 AM
                > To:   Don
                > Cc:   midrange-l@midrange.com
                > Subject:      Re: *** ADMIN: Ok, one more time, a POLL on
www.midrange.com
                > 
                > 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
                > +---
                +---
                | 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
                +---

Jon Erickson.vcf