Re: CF-Spec - another call for opinions

[dhandy@xxxxxxxxxxx (Douglas Handy)]

Bob,

>Oh wait, you won't have to worry about it, because
>software vendors will NEVER use the CF spec because it is not backwardly
>compatible!

Are you suggesting that software vendors will NEVER use anything that
can't compile under V3R2?  (Or did you mean even older than that,
which would cut out even subprocedures, etc.)

Do you think they will NEVER use new BIFs (even %editc), procedure
names over 10 chars, etc.?  Or any of the stuff Toronto has done the
last couple of years?

If Hans & Co addresses everything on your list of current RPG
shortcomings, do you think vendors will NEVER take advantage of it?

This seems like an ironic statement for someone whose specialty is
teaching "modern" RPG.

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
+---