The only difference I can see is a library list. WDSC uses the exact same compiler as PDM. Though the library list can be different between the two environments.
Mark Murphy
STAR BASE Consulting, Inc.
mmurphy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote: -----
To: "RPG programming on the IBM i / System i" <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Florin Todor - YYZ Concord"
Sent by: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Date: 06/27/2011 04:07PM
Subject: RE: Impossible to even think about rewriting in RPG
Hello,
I've been following this discussion from beginning and I see everybody
is happy with using WDSCi and advises to not use SEU anymore...
I've been using RSE for more than fours years now, but... I use it for
one single purpose, the source indentation; this feature is very useful
especially when you have to deal with old RPG style (the new stuff I
write is entirely in Free format).
Now the question arises why I don't use for the other beautiful feature
it has? Because, at beginning (as I said, about four years ago) I was
bitten pretty badly (I don't know if it was me, or it was a bug in that
WDSCi version I used (I *think* it was the same one I use today, v7.0)).
Long story short: I used RSE for editing a code, I compiled it and my
program ended in ugly-screen error; I re-compiled it (*without any
changes*) in SEU, it worked as expected; I re-compiled it again in RSE,
the error again...
After more investigation, I noticed that the error occurs in a *chain*
statement when only the first field of the record was populated (at the
exact match), the other fields were empty...
In the SEU-compiled version, all fields were populated (I am talking
about fields *used* in the program, down the road).
Did this happen to someone else?
Thank you
Florin Todor
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Kurt Anderson
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 3:28 PM
To: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
Subject: RE: Impossible to even think about rewriting in RPG
Hi John,
I use IBM Rational Developer for Power (RDp) 8.0 as my IDE.
There is a 60-day trial version of RDp 8.0:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/downloads/r/rdp/
So far you've probably seen WDSCi, RDi, and RDp thrown around. They are
the same product with different names at each of the versions listed.
The latest version, RDp, is much-improved.
In regard to what you say about any programmer able to make mincemeat of
/free so it's not readable - that can be said for anything. Spaghetti
code, horribly named variables, redundant code, sub-procedures using
global variables instead of local variables, no comments - yes, a
programmer can easily take anything meant for good and make it suck.
That's what shop standards and education is for.
Note: The IDE does do auto-indentation. However you can't highlight a
bunch of code and have say, "Format it," like you can in other IDEs.
There is an enhancement request in for this.
The benefits to using the IDE are numerous. To be honest, it took me a
few months to break from SEU and to use the IDE to code, but I can't
imagine going back. A couple things I love about the IDE:
- Verifying code to get a list of errors with the ability to
double-click an error and be taken straight to it.
- Seeing 75 lines of code at a time (due to the font and point size I
use)
- Readability: color coding in an IDE is there for a reason - you can
quickly digest what you're looking at by color association.
- Outline: allows for easy navigation as well as a means of seeing
definitions w/o moving through code
- Content Assist: Another tool to quickly see how something is defined
w/o even having to move your eyes over to the outline. Also a great
tool for auto-completion (which comes in handy with longer
field/procedure names).
Anyway, at most I hope you take some time to play with the trial
version. Yes, non-trial version it costs money, but if you find that
you like it, you'll likely find that you can justify it as well.
There's a WDSCi list on midrange as well. If you do decide to try the
trial, I suggest signing up on that list in case you have any questions.
They are a very helpful bunch (much like they are here).
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/wdsci-l
Kurt Anderson
Sr. Programmer/Analyst
CustomCall Data Systems
-----Original Message-----
From: rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:rpg400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of John Yeung
Sent: Monday, June 27, 2011 12:10 PM
To: RPG programming on the IBM i / System i
Subject: Re: Impossible to even think about rewriting in RPG
Blake, thank you for your description of what RDP does. It totally
sounds like it would be helpful, but getting my employer to spend hard
dollars is always a struggle.
Bryce, I will have to do more research. Large portions of our codebase
are still RPG III, and if I understand correctly, there isn't a way to
incorporate any ILE benefits to those until they are at least converted
to RPG IV. We do write almost all of our new RPG in RPG IV (making use
of the better syntax and BIFs and so forth but minimal if any use of
ILE), but right now I think there are still too many critical RPG III
pieces that we find it very daunting to make the wholesale switch. (I
fear some of those old pieces make use of dubious older features and
methodologies that I don't think we can just use the automated converter
to convert them all without breaking
something.)
I fully understand that most of the problem is irrational on our part,
but we do our best to knock the pieces we do touch into better shape
than they were before.
Dennis, I realize most assemblers for a very long time have not required
things to be in *specific* columns. However, my point is that long-time
users of legacy RPG get used to seeing things formatted in that *style*.
If you take a piece of columnar RPG code out of SEU and paste it into a
plain editor, then adjust all the opcodes to be further to the right by
a space or two, that does not change the human readability practically
at all, especially in RPG IV. SEU may care, and the compiler may care,
but the human typically doesn't.
Also, I think some older programmers (subconsciously) are aided by the
fact that only so much can happen on one line of traditional RPG.
When you can have arbitrary expressions (and this applies to EVAL, IF,
DOW, etc. just as much as /free), you can start to pack a lot more into
a line (and sometimes more and sometimes less), and for some brains, it
makes each line harder to parse.
When it comes to /free, I also have the peculiarity that I'm now used to
not having semicolons at the end of my lines. I find it especially
jarring that even an if statement needs a semicolon after it, because
this isn't how C works. (This is more of a writing hiccup than a
reading one.)
John
--
This is the RPG programming on the IBM i / System i (RPG400-L) mailing
list To post a message email: RPG400-L@xxxxxxxxxxxx To subscribe,
unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit:
http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/rpg400-l
or email: RPG400-L-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives at
http://archive.midrange.com/rpg400-l.
midrange.com
