RE: RPG IV and CF-spec "keep it IBM" -- RPG400-L

Doug,

>>I am having a difficult time understanding the argument that "it's 
>>no longer RPG."  
>
>I never said that.

No, but other folks seem to be.  I value your opinion greatly, and apologise
if I jumbled up several posts into a single response.  The kicker is that
there seem to be two distinct "camps" when it comes to RPG IV/ILE: The
"Don't touch RPG - it's already perfect" group, and the "Why don't you ever
go far enough to make it a real language?" group.  Taking the middle ground
doesn't really make anybody happy, alas.

>>   As far as I'm
>>    concerned, Toronto should have made RPG IV
>>    incompatible with RPG/400.  
>
>I have to disagree with you here.  Getting people to try RPG IV seems
>hard enough when you can convert it easily.  If existing code couldn't
>coexist nicely with RPG IV and if there was any incompatability when
>converting legacy code, it would be a harder sell to convince mgmt.

Controversial stance?  Sure!  Hindsight sure is working well for me today,
but look at the adoption rate of the "hybrid" RPG IV.  The fact that it is
compatible with RPG/400 has not improved the adoption rate any.  Why?  I
can't honestly say, but I suspect it's because the vast majority or midrange
programmers are afraid that they won't be able to understand it.  Mind you,
I completely understand that they haven't even *looked* at it, but that only
adds weight to my theory.

In this kind of situation, where basically the only adopters are those who
are already comfortable with C-like functions, I think that the language
would have been much improved even over it's current state if Toronto had
been given the green light to make it a new language.

My main reason for saying this is legacy code.  When we re-wrote our
interactive applications moving from S/3 to S/38, we were able to update the
code AND the logic.  We had a clean(er) slate to work from.  The converted
batch stuff has the old crummy code and the old crummy logic.  And then we
CVTRPGSRC and have old crummy RPG IV code the moment it is born.
Compatibility hasn't helped - it's hindered progress!

If it were really a new language, then IBM would have to make a truly
convincing argument to sell it.  Let's face it, Toronto is doing an awful
lot of work for precious little return.  If it were a cost centre, then it
would live or die on it's merit.  As it appears now, it would apparently
die, in which case the advanced shops would probably switch to C and
re-write anyway.

Buck Calabro
+---
| 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