Re: why rpg and not cobol

On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 5:13 PM, Dave <dfx1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

2013/4/10 <Dirk.Marien@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Choosing between them is like choosing between Outlook and Notes:
they have a slightly different way of 'processing', but basically, they do
the same thing, they have the same objective.

But on the i, I suspect that the overwhelming majority choose RPG. Why? Why
is COBOL the choice for mainframes?

The first answer from James (explaining the history) was a pretty good
explanation. "Report Program Generator" had a syntax well-suited to
its target audience. I would expand on it and say that building the
cycle into its design was also a major advantage for its intended use.
For that group of users/operators, and for the tasks they needed to
do, I would argue that RPG was *objectively better* than COBOL.

Someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that the machines
where COBOL dominated (and perhaps still dominates) did not come with
RPG.

Finally, though I think sheer inertia is the main thing that makes
most i programmers choose RPG over COBOL today, RPG does have some
distinct advantages for a modern audience. RPG IV is much more like
mainstream programming languages, whereas COBOL is more verbose and
English-like. And today, if you are working with databases and you
want English-like, you are going to go with SQL anyway, rather than
COBOL.

I disagree with Dirk that RPG is pretty much interchangeable with
COBOL. I mean, in a theoretical sense, it is. Both languages are
Turing complete. But when it comes to actually using them, they have
different enough styles that being comfortable with one doesn't
automatically translate into being comfortable with the other.

John