Re: Survey Numbers

["Buck Calabro" <calabro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Bill Meecham wrote:
> There are very many people who like to stick to what they are familiar with.
> They should be encouraged to adopt something new like ILE but it's not a
> problem, at least short term, if they don't.  I don't see the problem with
> shops that wish to continue development in RPGIII

 

Randy wrote:

>I wouldn't recommend depending on the CVTRPGSRC

>command to teach anyone great RPG IV coding practices.

>It makes no modifications whatsoever that demonstrate

>modern RPG IV coding techniques.

 

Hear, hear!  The idea is to fix the formatting so the RPG III program will compile as an RPG IV program.

 

>Nevertheless, since RPG IV and RPG III can coexist
>together, why keep writing something in RPG III even

>if existing code isn't going to be converted yet or full

>blown ILE design isn't going to be used yet? Even w/o
>using ILE techniques a programmer can be more

>productive in RPG IV.

 

Even if one never uses the free form specifications and never look at a BIF and continue to use the exact same style as your RPG III code, one gets the instant and wonderful benefit of Fewer Restrictions!  Long variable names!  Mixed case names!  Longer character fields!  More array elements!  10 character file names!  And the best part of all is that the learning curve for all these things is ZERO!  Who needs training to understand 15 character variable names as opposed to 6 character names?  There isn't an RPG programmer who hasn't said bad words about being limited to 6 character variable names...  Come on!  Who could resist a free upgrade (RPG IV's already bundled with the RPG III compiler) with a zero learning curve?

 

Buck Calabro