RE: What the compiler does, or not?

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> From: Hans Boldt
>
> Joe: I'm not a lexicographer.

Actually, IMO your role of defining the valid opcodes in RPG is about as
close to lexicography as we find in the programming world.  That's not to
say that your job is merely lexicographical in nature; I think we all agree
that writing a compiler is a phenomenally intricate bit of business.
However, in your role of defining opcodes you act as the lexicographer of
the RPG language.


> And who's stopping you from using MOVE if you really want to?
> Support for those old fixed-form opcodes will never be removed from
> the RPG IV compiler, and you know it.

We can't use MOVE in free form, which is telling us when and where we can
use it.  Either free-form is a new language, in which case you've removed
the MOVE instruction, or it isn't, in which case you've made RPG modal and
required us to switch modes during programming to use the MOVE instruction.
Either one is you forcing your idea of proper programming on thousands of
RPG programmers.  IMO you should make sure those opcodes work everywhere and
let us write the code that end users need, without having to worry about
what you think is correct.

You are the lexicographer, we are the authors.

Joe