RE: IBM i "Open I/O" Architecture

In my experience, they often call this "risk prevention". Apparently,
it's better to embrace the devils you know (crap code) than to rewrite a
brittle app... While I can understand the need to manage risk, I think
they score the risk of bad code too low. In the long term, a brittle
app carries enormous risk, even for trivial changes.

Jmo,
-Eric DeLong

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jerry Adams
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2009 2:59 PM
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: RE: IBM i "Open I/O" Architecture

-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Jon Paris

<snip>
It is often not the programmers themselves but the managers who won't
shift.
</snip>

Talking to other programmers and personal experience bears this out.
Managers/supervisors are loath to change for whatever reason, and then
the System gets the rap of being a "legacy" machine.

Boy, do I like being a one-man shop (System i-wise, anyway). My boss
wouldn't know the difference between RPG II/III/IV columnar coding (I
think he would notice the /free difference - but not sure about that).
As long as it doesn't cost anything, he could care less what language I
used.


Jerry C. Adams
IBM System i Programmer/Analyst
--
B&W Wholesale
office: 615-995-7024
email: jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx