RE: Convert from free to fixed

I believe that example solution came from Barbara, who has time and again
proven herself to be a leading-edge person (her position demands that,
right?).

The response to which I am replying is exemplary of something so many on
this list latch on to as examples of what's wrong with the longer-term
programmers on this list (and what's wrong with the world in general if such
discussions were allowed here). I've been around a long time. I use the
latest tools. I am not unusual in this respect. Don't write us off just
yet because someone still remembers how to do this stuff.

Dennis Lovelady
http://www.linkedin.com/in/dennislovelady
--
Those who live by the sword get shot by those who don't.

I was content just reading the banter until I saw this one. I just
can't resist now. :)

First, reverting from free to fixed format has nothing to do with the
integrity of the code. It is just another example of the "old dogs,
new
tricks" adage.

Secondly, one of the tongue-in-cheek examples that I saw didn't just
revert to fixed format, it reverted to some pre-RPG IV styles:

C *like define xmlfield temp
C len subst(p) bighunkdata:gttemp
C z-add 1 fnd
C temp lookup xmlfield(fnd)
10
C *in10 ifeq *off
C z-add 0 fnd
C endif

I'm not sure if it was intentional, but this little snippet made me
chuckle. It a fine example of how far the language (including fixed
format) has evolved, and how so many immovable programmers go with what
they know rather than growing with necessary changes. Seriously: z-add,
ifeq, internal indicators?

Finally (but certainly not all I have to say about this issue), free
format was introduced to RPG in 2001. How can that possibly still be
referred to as the "latest, greatest method?"

Tom Armbruster

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Tom Huff
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 9:18 AM
To: 'RPG programming on the IBM i / System i'
Subject: RE: Convert from free to fixed

Actually, I think it has more to do with maintaining the integrity of
the
code. When you have a couple of million lines of code, it is not nice
(or
practical) to have to rewrite every time IBM thinks of a new way to do
something. Not necessarily a better way, just a different way. When the
code
has all kinds of different techniques to do the same thing, it makes it
a
maintenance nightmare.
Personally, I think those kind of programmers who absolutely have to
code in
the latest, greatest method without regard to what the rest of the code
looks like should be FIRED!!! Or shot!!! Preferably both.

Just my .02
Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Scott Klement
Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2010 10:30 AM
To: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
Subject: Re: Convert from free to fixed

Hi Vern,

Nothing wrong with it - some think tried and true techniques should
never be used, just because they aren't their hottest new thing.

Frankly, that's not a common problem in the RPG community.

A much more common problem is to use old, clumsy, outdated techniques
just because folks are used to them. RPG programmers almost always
hang

on to outdated techniques long after better ones arrive, just because
"we've always done it that way."