Re: Free format H, F, D and P specs

I see what you mean by the work on the release.

As to the 50/50. For the last almost 15 years years I have asked
programmers if they are RPG ILE programmers and they always say yes so I
ask so you use built-in functions, What that?, procedures, no or the more
common answer what's that. You use modules, no or the more common answer
what's that, You use service programs, no or again the most common answer,
what's that, You use free format, no.

I looked for two years for another job because my previous company was
dumping the iSeries to go to a thick client package system written mostly
in VB3 (I know, makes a lot of sense) but try to find a company that would
allow you to use modern programming. Almost impossible. My new company is
allowing me to write new code in ILE but my primary job is to maintain RPG
III converted to RPG IV or programs written in RPG III with the RPG IV
compiler. I know they are out there somewhere but I sure haven't found
them.

Correction, I did find one, a job that I was perfect for but the manager
refused to hire me because she hated fat guys and I wasn't even that heavy
then. Oh, well. That how it goes.


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 6:00 PM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On 2013-10-07, at 7:41 PM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

<< Even if they froze it there would be a cost - one more compiler to

keep

up-to-date with the system changes. A new release is not a no-op on the
compilers even if there are no new features added.>>

I don't quite understand that. All the more modern compilers generate
Z-Code. Z-Code is what gets compiled to machine code. Any new language

is

still going to generate Z-Code.

Actually W-code but the effect is the same.

You seem to assume that compilers are like application programs and just
keep going no matter what the OS does but that isn't the case. In the case
of the OPM compilers I suspect that there is very little work to do with
each release other than test - which can be pretty big all by itself. But
with the current compilers there would almost certainly be work for every
release even if no features are added. Suppose a new data type gets added
to the database. RPG has to do something with it even if it is to ignore it
and/or refuse to process files that use the feature. Same thing with
display files, printer files, etc. All of the information that goes into
the PSDS (for example) is retrieved with API calls - what if the format
changes - and sometimes the internal interfaces do change even if the
"public" version doesn't. What if the JNI interface changes - the compiler
may have to adapt to generate to a new format. Sometimes changes in things
like security can affect the compiler. In my day we often spent days
checking just to be certain that planned changes were not going to require
us to make code changes. In many cases these days much of this is taken
care of by the fact that the RPG runtime is all in service programs and not
hard generated into each program as much of it was for OPM. As a result it
is less of a problem than it was when I was working on the compilers but it
is not a no-op.

Removing capability is also much more complex than simply commenting out a
few lines. The additional testing that would be required of the new
compiler would be massive. There's a reason that there was a big test team
when RPG IV was launched - they expended enormous amounts of resource to
make sure it still worked the me way - this would be no different.

<< If they get no additional revenue what's the benefit to IBM? - other
than keeping you and me happy which I'm sure is high on their must-do

list

<grin> >>
I would agree with that but then why are they putting all this new stuff
into the RPG IV except to keep us happy? It sure isn't for the 90%

writing

RPG III in RPG IV. They could care less.

They are keeping the language alive by continuing to enhance it. But that
doesn't mean they want to add an extra two compilers (current and prev for
the present RPG IV) that they have to maintain and test each release.

You are way over stating it at 90% in my opinion. I'd say closer to 50/50
but it is irrelevant.

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

We'll have to agree to disagree Alan.

Even if they froze it there would be a cost - one more compiler to keep
up-to-date with the system changes. A new release is not a no-op on the
compilers even if there are no new features added.

If they get no additional revenue what's the benefit to IBM? - other

than

keeping you and me happy which I'm sure is high on their must-do list

<grin>

On 2013-10-07, at 5:48 PM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Jon, they have frozen PDM. Why wouldn't they freeze RPG IV?.Other than

bug

fixes what would they need to do to it? It would be dead and how much

are

they paying to maintain compatibility with every release of RPG going

back

to the System 38, release one?

Hell, it would probably hardly ever be used anyway. Every company I

have

worked at everyone is writing RPG III in RPG IV. No one uses free

format

or

built in function or procedures or much of anything. I introduce it but
most people want nothing to do with it. RPG III was fine 20 years ago.

Its

fine today.

I am finding recent programs written with from and to positions in data
structures? How many years have we had the ability to define data
structures using just the type and size. Almost twenty? Almost every
program I see people are still using 6 character variable names for

fields,

even in files.

Bottom line is a very very small subset will use the new features. The

rest

will continue to write RPG III.


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:57 PM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

Simple question to ask yourself Alan - how much would you pay for it?

Your requirement would all but double IBM's maintenance requirements

and

thereby costs. Where do the $ come from?


On 2013-10-07, at 2:28 PM, Alan Campin <alan0307d@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

The following is my opinion only.

What I don't like about the announcement is that it is in the same
language, RPG IV. I think IBM should have come out with a new version

of

RPG, RPG V or maybe RPGM for RPG Modern with all the free form

syntax.

No

support for fixed format at all and all the old garbage out of the
language. A clean spec. A modern compiler built for multi-treading.

If

you

want to write modern go with the new language. Maintaining old stuff.

Use

RPG IV or RPG III.


On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 11:58 AM, Luis Rodriguez <luisro58@xxxxxxxxx>

wrote:

On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 1:17 PM, Jon Paris <jon.paris@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

wrote:

on

Agree 100%. What I like most of the new syntax is that the /FREE

/END-FREE

combo won't be needed anymore. Nice!! Now, if I only could make

management

agree on a new IBM i :-(

On the other hand, maybe the "hype" before the real announcement

was a

little too much. I was hoping something with more "substance". Maybe

some

new BIFs or something like that...

Regards,

Luis Rodriguez
IBM Certified Systems Expert — eServer i5 iSeries
--
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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.

--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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.

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com




--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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.

--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries)

(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.

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com




--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (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.

--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (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.

Jon Paris

www.partner400.com
www.SystemiDeveloper.com




--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) (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.