Thank you all again for the replies. =)
<Matt.Haas@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
You're already using ILE by using RPG IV.
Maybe I'm wrong but the way I understand it is that RPG IV is the version
of RPG that supports ILE, but that just by using the coding techniques,
ie. %found, doesn't make it a true ILE program. She agrees that we should
modernize, but sees no real compelling argument to learning binder
language, activation groups, and all the other ILE specific information
when the code being written already makes use of everything RPG IV has to
offer except for ILE binding using prototypes. She thinks that simply
separating reusable functions into program objects is enough.
If you were to write an application that made use of modular design, but
implemented as program objects, you would eventually find that the dynamic
call model was degrading your performance. This is hardly noticeable if
your application make only a few calls per transaction, but if you were
making hundreds of calls, performance suffers.
That prety much sums it up. Our performance is high enough where speed
isn't an issue even using program objects for modular design.
Most of the remainder of the roadmap involves the use of these ILE modules
within new architectures, such as SOA (web services).
That should be a good selling point. Future compatability is important to
her.
Younger programming staff won't understand the old style code, if they've
only worked in /free style
Heck, I can barely read RPG II code anymore myself, I can't imagine how
hard it would be for someone who started with an OO language first. And I
do love /free =)
midrange.com
