Re: Please vote for Syntax check in /FREE!

[James Rich <james@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

jt wrote:
> | -----Original Message-----
> | [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Hans Boldt
>
> | Joel: If we do that traditional RPG enhancement poll again, you'll
> | have your chance to vote on it. But personally, I think we have
> | enough good polling data to last us a couple more releases. For this
> | item in particular, we do indeed already have a very good idea how
> | popular it would be.
> |
> | Cheers! Hans
>
> I don't have time to be anything but blunt, at the moment.  I wanna debunk
> THIS myth, however:
>
> You and a lotta folks at IBM are VERY SADLY *MISTAKEN* to believe you have a
> "very good idea" of what the "average" user of RPG even DOES, Hans.  I
> didn't get very far in college, but I got far enough to understand the
> concept of how a *statistically random* sample can allow a small sample to
> accurately measure the whole.  (You do NOT have a statistically random
> sample with these polls, btw.)
>
> You think procedure overloading is anywhere even CLOSE to a necessity in
> **business application** design??   If you took a poll of ALL the RPG coders
> (and I mean every last stinking one of us, not the people who frequent these
> lists) then making RPG more object-orientated would be SO far behind
> improving SEU that it wouldn't EVEN show UP as a choice on the poll!!!
>
> I'm not gonna be popular with this list, of course, but imo (and I'm
> *fairly* certain the opinion of the VAST majority of ALL RPG coders) you
> wasted a lotta resources implementing /FREE, before you EVEN thought through
> how to effectively syntax-check the stuff.

So you believe you have your finger on the pulse of the majority of RPG 
programmers?  More so than Hans?  Are you in a position to make such a 
claim?  Do you not see the presumptuousness of your statements?

James Rich