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

How about RPG script in HTML!

>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Bob Cozzi [mailto:cozzi@rpgiv.com]
>>> Sent: Friday, August 06, 1999 5:32 PM
>>> To: RPG400-L@midrange.com
>>> Subject: RE: RPG IV and CF-spec "keep it IBM"
>>> 
>>> 
>>> The System/38 used to have Product Planners. These 
>>> individuals provided a
>>> common front to development for the System/38 product line. 
>>> They went out
>>> into the field and found Requirements, made the decision as 
>>> to what was real
>>> and what was nice to have. They prioritized things.
>>> 
>>> Today, a developer has a few free moments, builds something 
>>> with little
>>> regard to the "way" things are done on the product, and 
>>> then effectively
>>> approves their own design.
>>> 
>>> Hans and Co. have said that most (all?) new function in RPG 
>>> IV will be in
>>> the area of the Extended Factor 2/built-in functions. Are 
>>> they now going to
>>> say that the new features in RPG IV are going to in both 
>>> the CF-spec and the
>>> current EVAL/IF style C spec? Or is new stuff going to only 
>>> be introduced
>>> exclusively in the CF-spec?
>>> 
>>> If I (as a developer, not just me but others) can 
>>> completing disregard the
>>> CF spec and still use ALL new function in RPG IV, then I 
>>> could consider the
>>> notion. However I believe that some developer will sit in a 
>>> room, have a few
>>> free minutes and put stuff into RPG IV that only works on 
>>> the CF-spec. At
>>> that point, the CF-spec becomes it's own language, no longer RPG IV.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> FYI, today I write mostly in C++ today. I know Java, I know 
>>> CL, C, COBOL and
>>> Fortran. I even know MI and PL/I. I love PL/I, MI is okay, 
>>> C is interesting,
>>> but Java is still a bit confusing to me. But Java is my 
>>> newest language
>>> (only about a year experience with it) while C++ is what I use most.
>>> 
>>> C++ reminds me of PL/I--it is trying to do too much, so 
>>> some people are
>>> staying away from it. Now Java is being considered a lot. 
>>> But isn't ready
>>> and my concern is that it too will try to do too much and 
>>> people we being to
>>> shy away from it.
>>> 
>>> I do not want to attempt to write a compiler in RPG IV. I 
>>> have no need for
>>> that. I have written an LR1 parser in RPG III that works 
>>> great. That was
>>> fun, I have yet to care how to do the same thing with C or 
>>> C++ because the
>>> need isn't there.
>>> 
>>> Again I ask the question, is moving to the CF-spec going to 
>>> make my subfile
>>> look better, provide a GUI on the AS/400, or make the CHAIN 
>>> operation code
>>> work faster?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> Bob Cozzi
>>> 
>>> http://www.RPGIV.com
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> > -----Original Message-----
>>> > From: owner-rpg400-l@midrange.com 
[mailto:owner-rpg400-l@midrange.com]On
> Behalf Of Douglas Handy
> Sent: Wednesday, August 04, 1999 11:32 PM
> To: RPG400-L@midrange.com
> Subject: Re: RPG IV and CF-spec "keep it IBM"
>
>
> Bob,
>
> >Would you implement a feature as questionable as the CF-spec, with
only 5
> >out of 50 replies? Interesting.
>
> Consider that, of Jon's collected responses, those 5 represented 10%
> who voted for CF _even at the full $100 cost_ when it meant using the
> entire budget amount.
>
> Hans has already indicated that the actual cost will come in around
> $20.  Noone can predict with certainty how many people would have
> voted for CF if the original poll had projected the cost at $20 of a
> $100 budget allowance.  But I think it is fair to say that more than 5
> out of the 50 would have done so.  Granted, it still wouldn't have
> been 100%, assuming you were still voting.
>
> Hans also indicated they went ahead with the study to determine the
> real cost because they "thought it was the right thing to do".  And I
> have to admit, I agree. <g>
>
> Doug
> +---
> | 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
>
>

+---
| 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
+---
| 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