Re: i5/OS is better than Linux.

On Wed, 11 Apr 2007, Tom Liotta wrote:

James Rich wrote:

how are the few BIFs in RPG "better" than the vast
library of functions in glibc, gtk, and everything else in /lib and
/usr/lib?

Are those part of C? Just curious.

Good question. What is considered part of C and what isn't? I think most people would agree that printf() is part of C. But printf() is really part of glibc. So you could argue that printf() is not part of C (i.e. not "built-in") but added on through a library. Admittedly, you have to have glibc (or libc) to compile C programs so you could also argue very strongly that glibc is a part of C and therefore printf() is a part of C. But it is a library nonetheless. Similarly, almost all other functionality is done through C libraries like libz (compression), libm (math), or libresolv (DNS functions). With the exception of libc itself, the C compiler doesn't make any distinction between "standard" C libraries and "extra" add-ons. The only thing that makes a given C library "standard" is that everyone agrees that it is so. So I would argue that yes, those things I mentioned above are part of C.

It is interesting to me that RPG lacks such a vast library of code to draw from. It often seems to me that RPG developers want IBM to create a BIF for them instead of creating themselves a collection of service programs analogous to the rich collection of C libraries. Why is %len a BIF instead of simply calling a service program that exports len()? Why any of the BIFs? Wouldn't it make more sense to have them all as service programs and call them using the normal subprocedure call?

James Rich

It's not the software that's free; it's you.
- billyskank on Groklaw