RE: RPG naming

I disagree, and here's why: for whatever reason, new IT professionals
today seem to find it necessary to rename everything before they'll use
it.  My favorite is using "refactoring" instead of debugging.  But the
trend continues: they need a name for everything.  One of the latest has
been "constructor dependency injection".  What is this?  It's parameters
on the constructor!  WHOO HOO!

To be fair, the true constructor dependency injection concept is more
complex, involving metadata and a number of relatively advanced
techniques, but many people who use the term use it simply as a way to
put a name on adding parameters to the constructor.

What causes this?  It might be a way for newer programmers to shield
themselves from the fact that everything was actually written back in
the 60's and we're all just re-implementing it.  Those of us who started
in the 70's and inherited directly from that generation seem to have
less problem with this concept, but each succeeding generation seems to
want more "credit".  Maybe it's just that when I started all this stuff
was pretty hip and new, wheras today to admit you're using 40-year-old
concepts might seem highly uncool to newer programmers.  Of course,
mathematicians (of which we are a highly specialized subspecies) proudly
use theorems that are hundreds or even thousands of years old, so maybe
it's just a lack of classical training <grin>.

In any case, renaming RPG might just cause new programmers to see it as
a new beast.  And frankly, the RPG /free syntax is different enough,
with its BIFs and procedures, to warrant a name change.  But that's just
me.

Joe


> From: rick baird
> 
> it won't matter to existing non-iseries IT professionals/language
> bigots.  they will see it as nothing more than putting lipstick on a
> pig, and will pay little attention.  It will have about as much an
> impact as as/400 -> iseries -> i5.