Scott,
It does seem that the OP is new to RPG/400. Which begs the question: Why start there? Why not go straight to IV? Could be any number of reasons (such as those posed by Rory) - good or bad.
I used to (in a previous life) train RPG II and III programmers. Going from II -> III was relatively easy. Those that had started at III/400 had brain sprains when looking at II. Could be a similar situation with the OP. A local vo-tech here taught RPG III until about five years ago. I asked them, why not IV? "No demand." Bummer.
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 Scott Klement
Sent: Friday, June 26, 2009 1:05 PM
To: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
Subject: Re: Reset pointer PF file
hi Rory,
Rewriting (or even converting code automatically) requires retesting of all
that code. Testing takes time and money.
I agree completely. We have TONS of RPG II and RPG III code still
active and used on a daily basis by our users. It just doesn't pay to
spend the time/money rewriting code that's not broken.
However, we don't develop new code in RPG III. And if we make anything
but the most trivial change to an existing RPG III program, we convert
it to RPG IV, since we're going to have to re-test it anyway, it doesn't
hurt us to convert it.
The OP, on the other hand, appears to be learning the basics of RPG III
for the first time. That's a very different thing to me.
midrange.com
