Re: what was the single mgmt decision made in mid-1990s that slowed the evolution of ILE/RPG?

On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 2:43 PM, Nathan Andelin <nandelin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

From: Steve Richter
What decision would that have been and why was it made?

Well, Stuart Milligan, vice president of business development, Databorough implied that IBM decided not make RPG a fully OO language like Java and C#.

So what's the point? Databorough develops tools to convert RPG to Java. So his rant against RPG may be a thinly veiled attempt to get developers to use his tools.

Personally, I'm grateful that RPG is a procedurally oriented language, doesn't carry the overhead of a fully OO language, and hasn't evolved into bloatware like Java and MS .net runtime environments.

Nathan, I dont see why it has to be either/or. In windows you can
still code in C against the WIN32 API. Or use .NET and managed code.
If a decision was made to cutoff development of ILE, I wish people in
the know had spoken up and made the decision public.

What about the assertion that the AS400 was the death of the S/38
computer movement? Shops that were forward looking and interested in
writing cuting edge computer apps choose the S/38. Those that wanted
a 1960s architecture their company could afford selected the S/34 and
S/36. When the S/36 was folded into the S/38, all those S/36 users
came on board and started lobbying for the system not to be changed.
Resulting in the decision to lock down the features of ILE. Was ILE
designed by the S/36 or S/38 side of IBM?