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

Bob wrote:
>Actually, database I/O in RPG is easier, not better. I believe C actually
>has more I/O options than RPG does. But C is free format, so doesn't that
>make it better? Not to me.

So you're saying RPG is better than C?  Would you write a compiler
using RPG?  I wouldn't!  And it's not its fixed format syntax that
makes RPG unsuitable for compiler writing.  On the other hand,
most consider C unsuitable for business applications.  When you
say that one language is "better" than another, what you mean is
that one language is better for a particular problem domain.

Eric commented that he tries to learn one new programming language
a year.  I think that's a great strategy.  You know the old saying:
"If the only tool you have is a hammer, then every problem looks
like a nail."  Different languages are best suited to different
problem domains.  By learning different languages, you learn about
different approaches to problem solving.  I've always argued that
the best way to improve your RPG coding is to learn Java (or
rather OO in general).  It's sort of like how learning another
human language gives you a better understanding of another
culture.

To extend the metaphor further, like human languages and culture,
programming languages and culture also change, but much more
rapidly.  When RPG IV was born in the early 1990's, the internet
hadn't exploded out yet.  Java and CGI could barely be foreseen.
Things change.  And the past five years have seen more change
than the previous 15.  Interestingly, of the 20 or so odd
languages I'd played with during my undergrad years in the late
1970's, only a few remain in common use today:  COBOL, and C.
(I'm not sure if Basic and PL/I really count anymore!)

Like most things, RPG too will die someday.  I predict that the
last RPG program will be written sometime during the next
century.  A decade or so later, the last RPG program will be
taken out of production and the event will not be marked by any
ceremony.

To get back to a positive tone, the CF-Spec is very forward
looking.  The original RPG IV was intended to easily bring
old RPG III code into the realm of ILE.  But since many of the
traditional fixed-format opcodes will not be supported by the
CF-Spec, the CF-Spec is best suited for new code.  This is a
very optimistic statement.  As you know, since most programmers
have to support older releases, most won't get to use the CF-Spec
for another 5 years or so.  What we are saying is that we fully
expect programmers to continue writing new RPG programs 5 years
from now, in spite of all the pressures to move to other, more
modern, programming languages.

BTW, I don't want to sound like a Perl salesman, but check out
this story about Perl: <http://www.perl.org/advocacy/chiem.html>
To summarize, one student overwhelmingly trounced all competition
in the 1997 UCLA undergraduate programming contest by using Perl.
As a result, the contest organizers banned the use of Perl in
subsequent years.  Perhaps Perl has a valid claim to the title
"Best Programming Language"?  ;-)

Cheers!  Hans

Hans Boldt, ILE RPG Development, IBM Toronto Lab, boldt@ca.ibm.com


+---
| 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