Rory,
In a sense I agree with you. We have tons of RPG II code that I have to maintain (occasionally re-write, but not often).
But I don't see any reason to keep RPG III/400 code around. As for the old f**ts, there are probably a few out there older than me, but I just dove into ILE RPG. Of course, most of the original stuff stinks (now) and was just basic things. But thanks to the list, COMMON, and some other sources, it is relatively easy to expand one's concept and usage. One does not have to be a nuclear physicist to code ILE RPG.
Now I can understand a company not wanting to take the time to mass migrate *All RPG/400 code, but," if you've gotta touch it, upgrade it" is my philosophy. Easy for me to say since I'm a one-man RPG shop, and my boss pretty much gives me a free rein as long as I get the job done. I worked at a place pre-2000 that wouldn't tolerate using, much less converting /400 , RPG IV (forget about ILE). Thought it was near-sighted then; still do.
Jerry C. Adams
IBM System i Programmer/Analyst
--
B&W Wholesale
office: 615-995-7024
email: jerry@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Rory Hewitt
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 12:04 PM
To: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
Subject: Re: Reset pointer PF file
Rob & Scott,
Some might say that "perfectly valid reasons" also includes the (sadly too
common) reason:
"Management is unwilling to move away from RPGIII"
It's valid for the individual, if not for the company.
Although there *is* a case to be made that "If it ain't broke, don't fix
it". In other words, mcpanies that have lots of older RPGIII code (and
possibly older RPGIII programmers) may prefer to continue to code in RPGIII
which has its limitations than to train them to code in RPGIV, especially if
the limitations that RPGIV overcomes are not ones that they experience.
This is, after all, similar to the reason why there is so much COBOL code
around - because it works well and there's no real benefit to changing to
code in a different language (yes, I know that RPGIII and RPGIV are very
similar languages with code conversion utilities). COBOL is, after all,
significantly older than RPG.
Rewriting (or even converting code automatically) requires retesting of all
that code. Testing takes time and money.
On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 9:45 AM, Scott Klement <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>wrote:
hi Rob,
Sometimes it really makes you wish that IBM would charge extra for the
"heritage" compilers, doesn't it?
There are perfectly valid reasons to still be writing new code using RPG
III.
Maybe the OP works for a historical society.
Kind of like a museum, or a place like Colonial Williamsburg where they
try to recreate the way things were done in previous generations for the
historical value.
They probably still churn their own butter, use a horse to plow the
fields, etc.
(This is a joke. Please take it as such.)
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i (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.
midrange.com
