RPGIV has a back door to higher math functions, two in fact. Check out the ILE math APIs and the C function library. It's probably not as rich a selection as you can get in FORTRAN, but with relatively little effort you can bind them into your programs. > -----Original Message----- > From: Chris Bipes [mailto:ChrisB@cross-check.com] > Sent: Friday, July 30, 1999 8:26 AM > To: 'RPG400-L@midrange.com' > Subject: RE: RPG IV and CF-spec "keep it IBM" > > ************* Big Snip ****************************** > I would like to see more %biffs for higher > level math > functions that can be found in FORTRAN. (Perhaps they are > now available. > > Christopher K. Bipes mailto:ChrisB@Cross-Check.com > Sr. Programmer/Analyst mailto:Chris_Bipes@Yahoo.com > CrossCheck, Inc. http://www.cross-check.com > 6119 State Farm Drive Phone: 707 586-0551 x 1102 > Rohnert Park CA 94928 Fax: 707 586-1884 > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Bob Cozzi [mailto:email@example.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 29, 1999 8:18 PM > To: RPG400-L@midrange.com > Cc: one List > Subject: RPG IV and CF-spec "keep it IBM" > > > Geeze! > > How about we ask Rochester to add database I/O support to CL? > Would that > make all the CF-spec "nuts" happy? I mean come on! Even John Carr (who > originally suggested "CF") doesn't think it is a necessary feature. > > IBM Toronto has indicated that "most" people want the > "CF-spec". However, I > wonder if it is "most" people, or just the majority of the people that > answered their question. After all, if you DON'T want it or > DON'T care about > it, why bother telling Toronto? I mean, "most" people that answer the > question are going to want the CF spec. > > Don't get me wrong, I'm prefer natural expression syntax than the > limitations that traditional RPGII style code provides. But I > just don't see > how supporting: > > RPGIII > RPG IV > and > RPG IV with CF-spec > > is going to encourage IT Managers to supporting moving to RPG IV. > > So I ask you, if you do NOT care if the CF-spec every sees > the light of day, > or DON'T want the CF-spec, to voice your opinion now. > I feel we need an architecture for RPG. We need many poorly designed > features corrected, we need consistent designs and several > new features > before we effectively turn RPG IV into CL II. > > Let me know what you think. > > > Bob Cozzi > +--- > | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! > | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. > | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. > | To unsubscribe from this list send email to > RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. > | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: > firstname.lastname@example.org > +---END > +--- | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: email@example.com +---END
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.