|
Hans: There are some of us that have been following the "RPG/free" debate for years and would have killed for what IBM has in the wings now. Unfortunately, I just don't see this happening now. Too much emphasis on Java nowadays. Regardless, I'd like to answer your questions anyway. Dave (snip) > I would like to ask those interested to offer opinions on the > following design question: To what extent should the fixed-form > opcodes participate in the new scheme? It is possible to support > all except 9 or 10 opcodes. (Most of these require resulting > indicators, which are not allowed in the CF-Spec). But other > opcodes fall into a number of general groups: > > 1) IFxx, DOWxx, etc. There are currently expression alternatives > for these, so why bother carrying these forward in the new > scheme. Do we support these in the CF-Spec? ie. Do we allow > code like: " CF ifeq counter 17 "? If you're gonna do free form, do it right. Don't carry extra baggage into it. > 2) String ops: SCAN, SUBST, XLATE, etc. There are expression > or BIF alternatives (or will be) for most (possibly all) of > these. Do we support these opcodes in the CF-Spec? Don't support op codes which have alternate BIF's. > 3) Move ops: MOVE, MOVEL. You could code EVAL/EVALR for many > moves, but not all MOVEs are easily convertible to the EVAL > statement. Do we support MOVEs in the CF-Spec? (If not, we > would have to add additional new BIFs, which still wouldn't > cover all of MOVE semantics.) What MOVE semantics wouldn't be covered? Would other BIF's such as %SUBST, etc., take care of the problem? If not, I'd support keeping MOVE's. > 4) Arithmetic ops: ADD, SUB, etc. As many have already > discovered, arithmetic in expressions is not totally > compatible with arithmetic in the fixed opcodes. Do we > support these in the CF-Spec? ie. Do we allow code > like: " CF add 1 counter "? Would be good if the syntax for freeform RPG would be similar to other languages so the above expression would be nice. > (This list isn't complete, but is representative enough for the > purpose of helping us decide the issue.) > > So, the general issue is how much of the "old" stuff do we carry > forward in the CF-Spec and how much can we leave behind? > > Cheers! Hans > > Hans Boldt, ILE RPG Development, IBM Toronto Lab, boldt@ca.ibm.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 > +--- > +--- | 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.