If we are talking about "fresh" brains for *new projects* (maybe unique to IBM i because it can't be done easily on other platforms), RPG is irrelevant as are CL and REXX. Outside the IBM world, there is no RPG, no CL and no REXX.
Interesting. I disagree with almost all of that, though not violently.
It is hard for me to imagine a "new project" which can't be done
easily on other platforms. The only thing I can even think of which
*might* be hard to do on other platforms is integrate in a very, very
tight way to existing IBM i programs or data. And once you are talking
about *existing* IBM i stuff, then we're back to RPG being relevant,
as you said yourself in a later comment.
I also disagree that there's no Rexx outside IBM. It's absolutely a
niche language, but it has plenty of implementations and fans outside
the IBM world. If I had to venture a guess, I'd say it is probably
more popular outside of the IBM world than it is within the *IBM i*
world. I would think it is more popular on IBM mainframes than
anywhere else, though. In any event, it's a close enough approximation
to just say Rexx is irrelevant everywhere.
I agree that new projects on the IBM i don't *need* to involve RPG or
CL. So if you have such a project, and you want fresh brains for it,
those fresh brains do not have to learn RPG or CL.
programmers already skilled in C and C++ *are* available and it's "just" a matter of raising interest in about there's more than Linux and Windows.
Yes, there's also iOS and Android. ;)
If we don't limit ourselves to C and C++, but include all the various
languages available for PASE, then I mostly agree that IBM i could
expand its talent pool simply by recruiting "good programmers" rather
than necessarily "RPG programmers".
But I can't tell whether you are agreeing or disagreeing with Rob that
it probably doesn't do much good for IBM to make IBM i systems as
inexpensive and accessible to the general public as Linux, Windows,
and Mac. His argument seems to be: Even if people could buy IBM i
systems cheaply, that wouldn't do much to increase the mindshare or
talent pool of the platform. (I agree with this.)
The remaining problem is how to convince these fresh brains that it's worth looking at the platform because it is *not* old-fashioned, just like Linux and Windows aren't perceived old-fashioned because they have a command line.
That feels weird to me. If we are talking about programmers, I don't
know that they really "look at the platform" too much. I'm sure some
do, but in general, I think programmers are more concerned about the
nature of the work, not the platform. That is, I think most
programmers are saying "I would love to work on such-and-such a
problem". Or "I would love to work at such-and-such a company". And
not so much "I would love to work on such-and-such a platform".
(Honestly, I know some guys how are like "if you really *know* how to divide a problem in small steps to feed to a computer to build a solution, the exact programming language is mostly a matter of personal taste than a functional decision (aka, can't be done with language foobar)."
I would use different words, but essentially yes, the exact
programming language doesn't matter too much, from a technical point
of view.
John Y.
midrange.com
