×
The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.
Bob Cozzi wrote an article on what a fully free-form RPG V language
might look like, based on rumors that IBM is working on such a thing. I
have my opinions on the subject, and I'd be curious to know what others
here might think.
(See
http://systeminetwork.com/article/what-rpg-v-might-look)
What do I think? As the principle developer behind free-form calcs, you
might think I'd be happy to see a fully free-form language. But I'm
finding it hard to get excited about the concept. I think IBM missed
it's window of opportunity years ago. There was a lot of excitement
surrounding the release of free-form calcs. IBM should have capitalized
on that buzz immediately, and followed up with additional free-form
specs in the immediately subsequent releases.
But, at that time, the concensus was that there weren't really any
significant advantages to making other specs fully free-form, and that
other enhancements took priority. That's probably still true today. I
think RPG still needs some work in certain areas, such as namespace
support, an IBM-supplied procedure library, and externally described
procedures.
What do you think? Is there a need for RPG V? If IBM is indeed serious
about an RPG V, what might the rationale be?
Cheers! Hans
midrange.com
