Re: Standards and Egos (was RE: ILE Propaganda) -- RPG400-L

From: "Jim Langston" <jimlangston@conexfreight.com>
To: <RPG400-L@midrange.com>
Sent: Tuesday, June 26, 2001 9:11 AM
Subject: Re: Standards and Egos (was RE: ILE Propaganda)


> You have standards in RPG II, and you use them.  You switch to RPG III,
> come up with new standards, and use them in new programs.  Then you switch
> to RPG IV, new standards, then you implement RPG IV an come up with new
> standards, then you start using new op codes and implement those
standards.
>
> What do you wind up with?  A bunch of programs all with their own
standards.
> A lot of the stuff converted from S36 RPG (RPG II) in applications I've
seen
> (admittedly, all from the same vendor) were basically converted and as
> little code touched as possible, so you wind up with an RPG II program
that
> compiles and runs in RPG III.

Well, what you should end up with is a set of standards to be followed
depending on what the language is, right? Probably this would be easier to
follow if there was also a standard for where to store the source.

> Now the decision has to be made.  You are now on RPG IV with ILE using all
> these neat new %BIFs such as %Error and service programs and... you have
to
> go back and revisit one of these ancient now RPG III programs that were
> coded in RPG II.  It will take you 10 minutes to put in the program fix
> that some want's, if you stick to the program logic and standards in that
> program, or you can spend the next 2 days or more converting it to RPG IV
> with all the new bifs, you are basically rewriting the program.
>
> Is it then feasible to do this?  Is the cost incurred justified from an
> accounting point of view?

I think that call needs to be made on a case by case basis. If you are in a
program making a change that is pretty slight and the program hardly ever
needs to be looked into, you might not be well served to spend the time to
rip out the logic cycle and bring it up to ILE, or whatever. But if you are
maintaining a program that is often updated and is central in your
application, then you'll probably see great return on investment.

Really, it is you who can best make that call. You can look at the code and
get an idea of what it takes to rewrite it, and look at the mod you are
about to code and get an idea of what that is going to take. Measure the
trade offs and make a call on it. In some shops you'd have the freedom to
just go ahead with that based on your decision. Others you'd go back to your
manager for approval to change plans.

> I'm not sure, this is a question, not a statement.  I've done it both ways
> when I've come across these, I've spent the 10 minutes to make it work,
and
> I've spent the 2 days converting it (converting from internal to external
> declarations, etc...).
>
> Perhaps there is justification in bringing up all existing programs to new
> standards when they arise, then you won't fall into this trap.  But, it is
> a lot easier to convert a properly written RPG III program to RPG IV and
then
> implementing RPG.  It is not that easy to go from II to IV.
>
> I thought I was out of this RPG II hole since the application we were
using
> from S36 days from a vendor we are abandoning (we are already migrating
off).
> But, management purchased another application from them.  RPG III.  Right?
> Of course not, RPG II converted to RPG III to compile and run. Argh!  I
hate
> that company's products!

"That which does not destroy me..." ;-)

> Regards,
>
> Jim Langston
>

Chris Rehm
javadisciple@earthlink.net
If you believe that the best technology wins the
marketplace, you haven't been paying attention.


+---
| 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
+---