Thanks! (was: Re: X-Spec)

[boldt@xxxxxxxxxx]

Greetings!  I'd like to thank everyone for their response to
my questions!  Since I now have enough to go on, I'd like to
ask people to direct any further discussion to the RPG-L
mailing list.  I copied David's note below since that seems
to represent the most common opinion of the responders.  I was
first pushing to support as many of the old opcodes as
possible, but I've been convinced that we should only support
what isn't already doable in expressions and BIFs.

Earlier, someone described me as "brave" for bringing up this
subject.  He was right!  Based on some early negative feedback
we received from a very small group of outside reviewers, I
wasn't sure if this enhancement would survive.  But we pressed
forward believing it was the right thing to do.  When I posted
my questions here yesterday and Monday, I wasn't sure what to
expect.  I really didn't expect to get such positive results
on such a controversial item!  Everyone seems to understand
the issues and the reasons for doing what we're doing.  For
that, I am very grateful.

And now, based on your feedback, I have a few more BIFs to
design and code.  But that's okay, I'm not scheduled to start
coding the CF spec until next week and most of it is already
done!

Cheers!  Hans

Hans Boldt, ILE RPG Development, IBM Toronto Lab, boldt@ca.ibm.com




david.kahn@gb.abb.com on 99-05-12 09:09:17

Please respond to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com

To:   MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
cc:    (bcc: Hans Boldt/Toronto/IBM)
Subject:  Re: X-Spec (was: "RPG isn't cool")







boldt@ca.ibm.com wrote:

>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 "?

Let's leave these behind in the fixed format specs.

>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?

These can be hard enough to decipher in columnar format. BIFs please.

>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.)

In common with many others I'd like to have MOVE and MOVEL available in the CF
spec.

>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 "?

"CF  add 1 counter"  looks innocent enough, but
"CF  add Net Tax TotalInvoice" is not so clear. Again, let's leave these behind
if possible.

>(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?

Hans, no-one in this forum has said they're not interested. So it seems that the
programmers at least can't wait our hands on it. Roll it on. Let's not include
outdated opcodes except where they provide extra value; they will still be
supported in the C spec, after all. One thing I would ask is that you allow C
and CF specs to be mixed at will. Although it'll look ghastly and ruin the
indenting we all want, it will make the switch-over easier and allow its gradual
adoption. Good programmers won't mix the specs ad lib, of course, but they
should always have the option to slide a block of C or CF specs in anywhere.

Dave Kahn, ABB Steward Ltd.


+---
| 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
+---