RE: "extract" command enhancement

John wrote:
>But you raise an interesting point (in a round about way).
>
>Hey !  I thought Tononto wouldn't waste time providing
>functions that  were easy for us to create via Procedures??
>
>Then how come the %SUBDTZ  ???

Touche!

This goes back to our last enhancement poll.  Of the most popular
items voted for, two were date/time/timestamp operations in
expressions and more BIFs.  In fact, d/t/z operations in exprs was
the most popular of all items!  We know that RPG IV programmers
like expressions and BIFs - with our new functionality, you'll be
able to forget about all the existing d/t/z opcodes and do
everything in expressions.  In a sense, we're not really adding
new function, just an easier way to do things already available.

(Actually, back during V3R1 development, I argued that the d/t/z
operations should be implemented in expressions right from the
start, but that was viewed as too risky at the time.)

Anyways, I do see your point.  As you most certainly know,
deciding on new release content is not an easy thing, and many
factors have to be balanced.  In this case, the new d/t/z ops and
the new BIFs in general were added due to customer demand in the
poll.  You also have to consider that asking for enhancements in
the language is a very long-term process.  Since most programmers
have to support older releases, most won't even get to use what
they ask for for several years after the new function is available.

On the other hand, when many people ask for a particular enhancement
(like improved IFS support), most really want that enhancement now.
So obviously another consideration is this:  What are the
alternatives today?  That's where procedures are useful.  Rather
than complain about the lack of XYZ support in the language (which
is what you need today), since you have to write some new code
anyways to make up for the lack of the feature in the language, why
not spend a few more minutes to code it properly in a procedure?
If you code the interface right, you'd be able to reuse that code
whenever you needed that function again.  And if you share your new
procedure with others, they don't have to complain about the lack
of the function in the language either!

To summarize:  You want better IFS support and you want it now.
But even if we added better IFS support to the release currently
under development, you'd still have to wait until all of the systems
you support are at that release level, which probably won't be for
another five years.  The solution?  Write (and share) procedures.

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
+---