Re: Is RPG 'DEAD"

["Kelley" <kshaddrick@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Please pardon what might be a dumb and perhaps uneasily answered question, 
but...

Why should I care about the issues that Steve has listed below as well as 
others in previous messages?

The RPG that I write for the company I work for works just fine without 
these "features", although they could be implemented behind the scenes. Yes, 
we are a green screen company, it is the interface that my users want. 
Prototypes of systems rewritten using GUI technology were soundly rejected. 
Granted, this is probably not the case for the majority of companies on this 
list and certainly not the case for those of you writing code for sale.

K

----- Original Message ----- 

From: "Steve Richter" <stephenrichter@xxxxxxxxx>
To: "RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries" <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 10:18 AM
Subject: Re: Is RPG 'DEAD"


> COBOL is inferior to RPG because you cant modularize your code with
> parameters on a perform statement.  RPG is inferior to Java and C#
> because of memory leaks, no try ... catch .... finally blocks, no
> property setters and getters, no delegates, no data struct member
> functions, no virtual functions, ....
>
> RPG is OK, but C# and Java are more feature rich.