RPG programmers are willing to learn new stuff
avrahamn
Here are some examples of new stuff that was 100% better and must RPG
programmers accepted them with great appreciation:
* SELECT / WHEN / OTHER ENDSL
* Date and time functions.
LEAVE, LEAVESR.
*INZSR.
Array data structures
But some of the news stuff are doing one thing better and more
advanced, and some other things are going backwards.
RPG pragrammesr have the right not to accept the new stuff that is not
100% better and require from IBM to give them alternatives that is
100% better.
I thing than the command interface sysntax (with named object oriented
parameters - keywords) is much better than the procedure/prtototype
syntax and the programmers are entitled to request it fro IBM.
John Yeung
> RPG pragrammesr have the right not to accept the new stuff that is not
> 100% better and require from IBM to give them alternatives that is
> 100% better.
>
> I thing than the command interface sysntax (with named object oriented
> parameters - keywords) is much better than the procedure/prtototype
> syntax and the programmers are entitled to request it fro IBM.
I agree RPG programmers are justified in not being happy about certain
things in RPG IV. IBM isn't required to do anything, though. RPG is
their proprietary language, and I doubt they are working on it
anymore. We just take it or leave it. (If we're an AS/400 shop, then
most likely we take it, because the alternatives tend to be even
harder to use or worse-performing.)
I'm sure IBM have calculated the costs and benefits of trying to
improve RPG further, and I'm equally sure their conclusion is that
it's not worth their time, effort, and money. I think the vast
majority of existing RPG programmers are fine with either RPG III or
RPG IV or some mixture of those (since RPG IV does allow most RPG III
ways of doing things), and there aren't many new RPG programmers
coming in to be unhappy about it.
John