I personally don't think we'll ever see a completely new version of RPG. I expected incremental improvements forever.
From: John Yeung [mailto:gallium.arsenide@xxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2019 8:53 AM
To: RPG programming on the IBM i (AS/400 and iSeries) <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Free format question on D specs
On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 5:27 PM Barbara Morris <bmorris@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The compiler code for scanning free-form definitions is almost all the
same as for fixed-form code, and there are a few things available in
fixed form columns that the compiler needs so it knows which direction
It's a fascinating glimpse into language design and compiler design.
Has there been any thought given to the idea of an RPG V? It would a great opportunity to completely exorcise fixed-form, and maybe rework some things so that the language is more maintainable and extensible.
(That latter thing is just a pure guess on my part. I have zero actual knowledge of RPG internals.)
The compiler takes completely different paths for externally-described
vs program-described data structures, so it needs to know right away
what it's dealing with.
Could the scanner not incorporate some amount of look-ahead (i.e., put off some decisions until more information has been scanned)? I mean, some keywords *can* be moved around, both in fixed and free, so....
Earlier you said the free-form scanner code is "almost the same" as the fixed-form scanner code. Why almost? Why isn't there a single codebase which serves both? If they are separate anyway, why couldn't the free-form scanner be made deliberately less similar? (And again, maybe this is something for RPG V.)
Please don't take this as grilling. It's more just musing. I have incredible respect for language designers and implementers, and in particular for those who have worked or are still working on RPG.
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.