Re: RPG-III to -IV conversion rehash worries

Have you considered looking at the Linoma tool for this?  I've not looked
at it for a long time but it used to be a really decent first pass to do
this with...

Don in DC

------------------------------------------------

> It's been *many* years since I've converted RPG-III to -IV.
>
> We have a *ton* of legacy RPG-III apps, many of them monoliths, including
> this one that I'm enhancing that is 13000+ lines long.
>
> (BTW, please no lectures here.  All new apps are written in ILE, and any
> -III apps are converted as is possible within the constraints of the
> project
> specs.  When I see a mod that involves a date calculation of some sort, my
> RPG-IV brain says "no sweat, let's do..., oh crud, it's RPG-III!", but
> most
> times I am unable to justify a conversion when a modification, by itself,
> is
> essentially a 15-minute project.  We get a lot of those here.)
>
> In this particular case, the RPG-III app in question has some fairly major
> modifications in store.  I am trying to use this project as a
> learning/teaching case to convert other apps in the future.  The first
> thing
> I want to do is to move the bulk of the code into modules, and test the
> resulting app to ensure that it functions the same as the legacy app.
> Once
> that's assured (?), I would make my modifications.
>
> I converted the source to this particular app to -IV via CVTRPGSRC, and
> then
> tried Brad Stone's CVTILEFMT.  It compiles fine, but I am dreading having
> to
> test this monster to determine that the conversion doesn't introduce
> errors
> or functional differences from its RPG-III counterpart.
>
> The first thing I looked for was the potential for numeric overflow.
> IBM's
> conversion keeps all the opcodes the same, so no real issues there.
> Brad's
> conversion allows you to convert the IBM conversion to more readable
> stuff,
> including converting math opcodes to Eval's.  Now, I wanted to check for
> numeric overflow warnings from the compiler.  Amazingly, the only messages
> issued by the compiler were the standard "field not referenced", "record
> format not used", and "RPG handles blocking" messages.  C'mon, I thought,
> a
> 13000 line app so well designed that there are no "potential overflow"
> warnings???
>
> As a sanity check, I wrote this Q&D app to test the compiler (chopped the
> first 20 or so columns):
>      z-add     5             Five              5 0
>      z-add     6             Six               6 0
>      z-add     Six           Five
>      eval      Five = Six
>      Eval      *inLR = *On
>
> I would have expected that the compiler would have flagged the EVAL
> statement since the potential for numeric overflow during runtime would
> stop
> the program.  Didn't the compiler used to do this?  I could'a sworn I'd
> seen
> this before.
>
> Anybody have a cheat sheet for 3-to-4 conversions?
>
> TIA,
> Dan
> --
> This is the RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries (RPG400-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
> or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.
>
>