Re: midrange modernization tour question -- MIDRANGE-L

Hi Alan C., 

> I kind of think that we would have been better off if IBM had given us that 
> choice. New compiler for ILE development. You want to stay in the old 
> monolith 
> world, just keep writing RPG III. As I have said many times, I think IBM 
> should 
> still do it. Quit screwing around with the old stuff and give us a clean new 
> version. If people are going to write RPG III monolith code, they are just 
> going 
> to keep doing that. Why do they want new features? At least that is what it 
> is 
> like in my shop. 20 some programmer just writing RPG III in RPG IV and I am 
> only 
> using ILE. One guy uses new features but still writes monolith. Everybody 
> else 
> writing RPG III in RPG IV and using nothing of new features. 

I was a one-man shop, and rather appreciated being able to "ease forward" 
without just going bang all at once. This is in keeping also with my strong 
philosophy that the idea that incremental changes, especially into production 
environments, are far superior to big bangs for many reasons

Now that is, granting that there are exceptions.  

- AlanC. :) 


> Paul, kind of disagree with you there. In a very real sense, VB6 programmers 
> and 
> RPG programmers are in the same boat. 
> 
> ILE RPG is a whole new language, a complete different way of thinking and 
> people 
> on the AS/400 are fighting ILE as hard or harder than VB6 programmers are 
> fighting VB.NET. I can't really say that ILE RPG is compatible with the old 
> RPG. 
> The way you write code is just so different. If you want to write ILE RPG, 
> you 
> are basically in the same boat as the VB6 people, rewrite or leave the old 
> stuff 
> and use ILE for new development. 
> 
> I kind of think that we would have been better off if IBM had given us that 
> choice. New compiler for ILE development. You want to stay in the old 
> monolith 
> world, just keep writing RPG III. As I have said many times, I think IBM 
> should 
> still do it. Quit screwing around with the old stuff and give us a clean new 
> version. If people are going to write RPG III monolith code, they are just 
> going 
> to keep doing that. Why do they want new features? At least that is what it 
> is 
> like in my shop. 20 some programmer just writing RPG III in RPG IV and I am 
> only 
> using ILE. One guy uses new features but still writes monolith. Everybody 
> else 
> writing RPG III in RPG IV and using nothing of new features. 
> 
> Just so I am clear, I am not saying that RPG IV is not compatible to the old 
> RPG 
> III. You can continue to write RPG III monolith programs in RPG IV to your 
> hearts content but that is not ILE anymore than writing VB6 programs in 
> VB.NET 
> is writing VB.NET. 
> 
> Both represent the same problem. Giving up the old monolith ways and moving 
> into 
> modern languages. 
> 
> I agree absolutely that VB.NET is a completely new language but try to get a 
> VB 
> programmer to accept that. I worked with a group a few years ago and all I 
> heard 
> over and over again was, "It's just a new release". 
> 
> My own opinion is that Microsoft should have just ended the updates at VB6 
> and 
> started moving everyone to C#. VB.NET stinks. Half one thing and half 
> another. 
> Start clean if you are going to have to rewrite anyway. 
> 
> Tying this back to the midrange. I read that a lot of VB shops are going to 
> Java. If they are going to have to rewrite, why not rewrite in something more 
> portable? This company I worked at a few years did just that although they 
> screwed it up. 
> 
> >> message: 1
> >> date: Tue, 14 Jun 2005 15:29:15 -0400
> >> from: "Paul Morgan" <pmorgan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >> subject: Re: midrange modernization tour question
> 
> >> Steve,
> 
> >> Ooooo!  .NET programmers get what C++ programmers have had for a long time
> >> and what Java programmers got about six months ago.
> 
> >> That major new release of ASP.NET is going to have so many compatibility
> >>problems with the current version it ain't funny.  Ask all those VB 6.0
> >> folks if VB.NET was compatible.  Most of them are STILL balking at moving 
> >> to
> >> VB.NET.  It's the same language in name only.  Nowadays Microsoft doesn't
> >> give a damn about release compatibility.  You won't find that problem on 
> >> the
> >> Iseries.  You're right that there is no comparison.
> 
> >>Paul
> 
> --
> Paul Morgan
> Senior Programmer Analyst - Retail
> J. Jill Group
> 100 Birch Pond Drive, PO Box 2009
> Tilton, NH 03276-2009
> Phone: (603) 266-2117
> Fax:   (603) 266-2333
> 
> Steve wrote
> 
> > .NET programmers are getting generics and a major new release of
> > ASP.NET in November 2005.   RPG is getting a few new %bifs.  There is
> > no comparison.
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
> To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
> visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/midrange-l
> or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
> at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>