|
I think this problem is an old one. The IBMers who handle the QSYSINC frequently respond with "I don't know how you would do that in RPG" or "I don't know RPG [IV] very well" or "It would break existing code if we did that." And yet they broke existing code by including 31-digit packed fields recently.
Breaking compatibility is a very easy problem to solve. As for not knowing how to do it in RPG -- that may be a problem for an individual developer, but it's not a problem for IBM as a corporation. IBM invented both i5/OS and RPG, they have the skills.
This would be like Microsoft saying "We can't make the functionality in the Windows API available for .NET, because we don't know .NET" the whole statement is ridiculous.
If IBM truly lacks the talent, hire me.
I my view the RPG includes should the highest priority and the ones on which the others are based. Build the RPG IV includes first, then port those to the other languages-not the other way round.
Exactly.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.
midrange.com
