You aren't the only teacher around. I have taught classes as well so I know better.
As to languages, I know far more than just RPG so don't try to lecture me.
I can do in 3 lines in the cycle that takes more in non-cycle.
Try sticking to the old saying "if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all."
Sharon
-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Trevor Perry
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2007 2:11 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: RPG Cycle (was: RPG IV Certification)
Sharon,
I used to teach a class called RPG for Performance and Maintainability. I
always had programmers who were Java or COBOL programmers who would thank me
for giving a session that they could understand. Some reality, eh?
In this world where a programmer can learn a new language in a few weeks,
why would we not expect a programmer to understand a program written in
another language? Most differences between languages boil down to syntax -
other than the cycle, probably :-) To say that a programmer should be
limited to one language - now you are not in the real world.
And the beauty of the NEW techniques is that they work, they are easier to
maintain, and improve responsiveness of the IT organization. Who says a new
technique would require 80 lines of code over 3 for a cycle program? Using
ILE with the ability to plug in modules, I expect most new programs are MUCH
shorter than your old RPG - cycle or not.
I started with the cycle - 25 years ago. I maintain programs that use the
cycle - for most of those 25 years and also in 2007. If you want to tell me
to shut up, you may want to try another approach.
Trevor
On 8/20/07 3:01 PM, "Sharon Wintermute" <SWintermute@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Trevor,
I usually don't respond to this kind of rhetoric, but it is quite obvious you
do not have a clue what reality is all about.
The idea that a COBOL programmer should be able to maintain RPG is not valid.
That's like saying a Java programmer can maintain PL/1.
The beauty of some of the old techniques is THAT THEY WORK.
Writing code in 3 lines versus 80 is definitely a plus. This also reduces
program size, memory requirements, etc. You should use whatever technique
gives the best result "for that application". Sometimes its cycle, usually it
is not.
Since you plainly don't know how or why to use the cycle stay quiet.
Sharon Wintermute
PS. Under 50 and have used the cycle.
--
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at
http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
CONFIDENTIAL
This e-mail and any files transmitted with it are the property of
BillSoft, Incorporated and/or its affiliates, are confidential, and are
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom this
e-mail is addressed. If there is a non-disclosure agreement in effect
between BillSoft and the recipient, the contents of this email and any
files transmitted with it should be treated as confidential under the
terms of such agreement. If you are not one of the named recipients or
otherwise have reason to believe that you have received this e-mail in
error, please notify the sender and delete this message immediately
from your computer. Any other use, retention, dissemination, forwarding,
printing or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited.
"BillSoft" and "EZTax" are registered trademarks of BillSoft,
Incorporated.
midrange.com
