Re: RPG IV and CF-spec "keep it IBM"

Bob,

At 10:18 PM 7/29/99 -0500, you wrote:

>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.

 Necessary, no.  Very useful to writing better code? Yes.  The ability to
indent and write expressions that don't need to waste most of the line are
needed for readability.

>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.

 If the (perceived) rigidity of the laguage is overcome, then maybe there's
a chance of getting fresh talent into the fold.  Plus, as mentioned above,
it makes programming and maintenance easier.

>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.

 Since the CF spec is pretty much coded, I think the incremental payoff
outweighs the minimal cost.  I agree that there are important improvements
to make, but I think that you should direct your efforts into pushing for
those improvements, not trying to stifle this feature, IMHO.

 -mark

+---
| 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: david@midrange.com
+---END