Re: RPG Cycle (was: RPG IV Certification)

[Trevor Perry <trevor@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Sharon,

I used to teach a class called RPG for Performance and Maintainability. I
always had programmers who were Java or COBOL programmers who would thank me
for giving a session that they could understand. Some reality, eh?

In this world where a programmer can learn a new language in a few weeks,
why would we not expect a programmer to understand a program written in
another language? Most differences between languages boil down to syntax -
other than the cycle, probably :-) To say that a programmer should be
limited to one language - now you are not in the real world.

And the beauty of the NEW techniques is that they work, they are easier to
maintain, and improve responsiveness of the IT organization. Who says a new
technique would require 80 lines of code over 3 for a cycle program? Using
ILE with the ability to plug in modules, I expect most new programs are MUCH
shorter than your old RPG - cycle or not.

I started with the cycle - 25 years ago. I maintain programs that use the
cycle - for most of those 25 years and also in 2007. If you want to tell me
to shut up, you may want to try another approach.

Trevor



On 8/20/07 3:01 PM, "Sharon Wintermute" <SWintermute@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Trevor,
>
> I usually don't respond to this kind of rhetoric, but it is quite obvious you
> do not have a clue what reality is all about.
>
> The idea that a COBOL programmer should be able to maintain RPG is not valid.
> That's like saying a Java programmer can maintain PL/1.
>
> The beauty of some of the old techniques is THAT THEY WORK.
>
> Writing code in 3 lines versus 80 is definitely a plus. This also reduces
> program size, memory requirements, etc.  You should use whatever technique
> gives the best result "for that application".  Sometimes its cycle, usually it
> is not.
>
> Since you plainly don't know how or why to use the cycle stay quiet.
>
>
> Sharon Wintermute
>
> PS. Under 50 and have used the cycle.