Is RPG a “Dead Language”? – My reaction to Mel Beckman’s article at iPro and the reactions

English: Python logo (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Mel Beckman has written an article that repeats a theme I’ve seen since the days when I first started writing code in the first widely used version of RPG in the 1970′s. There’s always a variant of RPG is dead, RPG is dying, RPG is fading away, and all that. But I always pay attention, because all things change in this world below on here on Earth. It seems like the main reason he says this is that, according to him, not much new code is being written in the newest version of RPG-IV and that most of the time spent doing RPG is on maintaining existing RPG code, as in fixes, enhancements, and the like.

Find it here: http://www.iprodeveloper.com/article/opinion/is-rpg-dead-699217?cpage=6#commentsAnchor

I’m glad iprodeveloper opens it articles up for comments. For web sites that open up for comments so readers can offer their reactions, I’m finding these days that the comment section gets at least as interesting as the article itself. Actually, the article plus the comments generally make good reading.

For example, Mel Beckman listed a lot of other languages as newer and more promising for writing new code. He gives examples he calls “more-modern” languages: “More-modern languages such as C (including C++ and C#), Java, JavaScript, Perl, PHP, Python, and Ruby (all of which run natively on IBM i)”.

Aaron Bartell pointed out that for a some of these you have to have multi-layered implementations to make them work, with the extra load of maintaining and configuring each layer. Someone else pointed out that training current staff (the ones that know your business) in new languages is not cheap either.

I’ll add my own observation that each layer of technology -hardware, third-party software, external servers and applications, and so on– comes a multiplier in maintenance load.

Jon Paris added his observation that for one of his recent classes he was teaching the newest RPG, RPG-IV, to programmers that code in C, C++, Java, and others. He also added that the Java programmers are delighted with the ease of performing some functions in RPG.

Well, one more thing. The current generation and latest versions of RPG, RPGLE or RPGIV, have incorporated great advances that utilize, or enable the use of new techniques and possibilities. And while it does not have object-oriented syntax, with the intelligent use of subprocedures and service programs, it does enable advantages that are generally associated with OO programming.

Here’s an alert to utility software providers: there just might be a market for a precompiler that does OO things, that for example expands an embedded OO syntax into RPG code for compiling, similar to how the 4GL’s are said to work.

There are some programmers where I work who do new coding in COBOL, too.. Nothing wrong with that for the purpose, depending. But more on that later, and on refactoring code in a future article.

 

Related articles

• The Rise and Fall of Programming Languages in 2011 (drdobbs.com)
• Using Mustache.java Templates With Struts 2 (java.dzone.com)
• GUI Programming (enthackerspace.wordpress.com)
• In court filing concerning copyrightability, Google contradicts its own Android compatibility definition (fosspatents.com)
• Programming as a Foreign Language (nuts.redsquirrel.com)
• Python’s Claim (pgbhat.wordpress.com)
• Converting C# to Java – An Experiment (Part 2) (adndevblog.typepad.com)
• Introducing SDFRY, The Modern Programming Language (nathan.ca)
• The importance of language-level abstract Unicode strings (unspecified.wordpress.com)
• C Programming in Easy Steps (i-programmer.info)
• Web Glossary part one: Application tier (bartongeorge.net)
• My Language is Better than Yours (java.dzone.com)
• Summer Internship in Red Hat (eischmann.wordpress.com)
• Death by boilerplate: Iterating over lines in a file in Java (vs Scala, Ruby, Groovy) (thecodegeneral.wordpress.com)
• SciRuby: Science and Matrix Libraries For Ruby (science.slashdot.org)

Google guilty of infringement in Oracle trial; future legal headaches loom

Google guilty of infringement in Oracle trial; future legal headaches loom:

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2012/05/jury-rules-google-violated-copyright-law-google-moves-for-mistrial.ars

In what could be a major blow to Android, Google’s mobile operating system, a San Francisco jury issued a verdict today that the company broke copyright laws when it used Java APIs to design the system. The ruling is a partial victory for Oracle, which accused Google of violating copyright law.

But the jury couldn’t reach agreement on a second issue—whether Google had a valid “fair use” defense when it used the APIs. Google has asked for a mistrial based on the incomplete verdict, and that issue will be briefed later this week.

So there you go, it’s official now. Oracle has every intention of putting its Java toothpaste back in the tube, and it has a big lawyer staff to help do it. They are famous for taking open source territory and staking a claim in it and digging in with its proprietary claws, and making money every way it can, tooth and nail.

They just took Java out of the running. Sun released it to the open source world.

And by the way, software algorithms are “patentable”? This is as preposterous as any mathematical solution to any math problem, the maps to get to there from here on paper, or in your mind, or a thought experiment.

So these two giants have proven arrogant, and they’re going after each other, and they’re acting like the pie is limited.

Larry Ellison has said “Privacy is dead, get over it”. And Google’s guys has said anonymity is dead. Easy for them to say, darlings of Bill Clinton and Barack Obama and other entrenched establishment types. Anonymity is the defense of the poor guy against such power houses, and dictators.

 

Related articles

• Jury: Google infringed Java copyright, but we’re not sure it’s worth a $1 billion penalty (androidauthority.com)

Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft (updated)

Skype replaces P2P supernodes with Linux boxes hosted by Microsoft (updated):

http://arstechnica.com/business/news/2012/05/skype-replaces-p2p-supernodes-with-linux-boxes-hosted-by-microsoft.ars

Microsoft has drastically overhauled the network running its Skype voice-over-IP service, replacing peer-to-peer client machines with thousands of Linux boxes that have been hardened against the most common types of hack attacks, a security researcher said.

The change, which Immunity Security’s Kostya Kortchinsky said occurred about two months ago, represents a major departure from the design that has powered Skype for the past decade. Since its introduction in 2003, the network has consisted of “supernodes” made up of regular users who had sufficient bandwidth, processing power, and other system requirements to qualify. These supernodes then transferred data with other supernodes in a peer-to-peer fashion. At any given time, there were typically a little more than 48,000 clients that operated this way.

Kortchinsky’s analysis, which has not yet been confirmed by Microsoft, shows that Skype is now being powered by a little more than 10,000 supernodes that are all hosted by the company. It’s currently not possible for regular users to be promoted to supernode status. What’s more, the boxes are running a version of Linux using grsecurity, a collection of patches and configurations designed to make servers more resistant to attacks. In addition to hardening them to hacks, the Microsoft-hosted boxes are able to accommodate significantly more users. Supernodes under the old system typically handled about 800 end users, Kortchinsky said, whereas the newer ones host about 4,100 users and have a theoretical limit of as many as 100,000 users.

“It’s pretty good for security reasons because then you don’t rely on random people running random stuff on their machine,” Kortchinsky told Ars. “You just have something that’s centralized and secure.”

Kortchinsky discovered the Linux supernodes using a Skype probing technique he and colleague Fabrice Desclaux first demonstrated in 2006. (PDF versions of conference presentation slides are here and here.)

Kortchinsky’s discovery comes as Microsoft said it’s investigating recent demonstrations of an exploit that exposes the local and remote IP addresses of users who are logged in to the service. The attack reportedly relies on the open-source SkypeKit package.

…more…

Related articles

• Week in tech: Microsoft’s Linux supernodes, Ubuntu’s best apps, and more (arstechnica.com)
• Microsoft Using Linux To Optimize Skype Traffic (linux.slashdot.org)

Honduran Teen Invents Cheap, Simple Eye-Tracking Device For Disabled

Open source programmed, uses a simple sensor that can attach to a simple pair of glasses or sunglasses, he built it himself while doing his senior year of high school, got accolades in fairs for it, and he’s selling it to support his way through college:

Honduran Teen Invents Cheap, Simple Eye-Tracking Device For Disabled:
http://www.popsci.com/diy/article/2011-11/honduran-teen-invents-cheap-simple-eye-tracking-device-disabled

At gizmag.com:
http://www.gizmag.com/luis-cruz-eyeboard-eye-tracking-computer-interface/20500/

You can invest here:
The Eyeboard – Low cost eye tracking system by Luis Cruz — Kickstarter:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/lcruz/the-eyeboard

I think this is the Do-It-Yourself kit for just $99.00:
http://www.intelsath.com/

Related articles

• Honduran Teen Invents Cheap, Simple Eye-Tracking Device For Disabled Available in 2012 for $300 By Rebecca Boyle (imullins89.wordpress.com)
• Eyeboard: an inexpensive eye tracking system created by a teenager [Video] (winextra.com)
• Teenage Honduran builds open source eye-tracking computer interface for the disabled (fourbluehills.com)
• Teenage Honduran builds open source eye-tracking computer interface for the disabled (gizmag.com)
• Teenager Builds $300 Open Source Eye-Tracking System (tech.slashdot.org)
• EyeGuide™, the Most Affordable Eye Tracking System on the Market, Begins Shipping Worldwide (prweb.com)   ….[Editor's note: Most affordable? ...not anymore!]
• SMI’s Eye Tracking Glasses (ohgizmo.com)
• Social Media Fights Eye-tracking Golden Triangle (seochat.com)

Science and Technology Research

It’s too bad in my opinion that academia and research has come to depend on government grants. The government monopoly especially on K-12 education is precisely the biggest block to giving brighter kids a chance to break free from constraints of ignorance.

As seen here, it creates a dependency that becomes a circular trap, subjects innovation to the political winds (whether via republic or dictatorship), and dissident research is suppressed through this mechanism along with peer review.

Thinking outside the box, the biggest innovations of most impact have been driven by industry and competition. Cell phone technology, transportation technology, Internet search technology, communications, and in almost all sectors of our lives. Even the awesome Israeli security technology makes use of private sector technology.

But yes, tell parents to take over their children’s education and drive them to better standards.

Online gamers crack AIDS enzyme puzzle | Games Blog – Yahoo! Games

See, scientific peer review is overrated by modern scientific tradition, and amateurs are underrated…

Online gamers crack AIDS enzyme puzzle | Games Blog – Yahoo! Games:
http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugged-in/online-gamers-crack-aids-enzyme-puzzle-161920724.html

Time to break scientists FREE from the constraining strictures of so-called “peer review”. Peer review feeds intellectual corruption, meaning any kind of motivations can hide behind the cloak of anonymity. It is a system with built-in constraints on revolutionary ideas in science, or against any ideas that buck currently entrenched ascendency.

“Peer-reviewed journals” and the reviewers that get to pass judgment on others’ ideas certainly have a vested intellectual and powerful monetary interest in keeping the idea alive, but it does not help further science. They may have a place in the on-line world, if they get their act together quick enough, serving as forums for the open discussion of ideas.

They can also, once they are past their fears of the future, IF THEY ARE HONEST, they can also serve as arbiters of who is first with a new idea or theory, although if everything is in the open, and as long as the Internet is relatively free of authoritarian interference, that may even become free of such institutional dependency.

Steve Wozniak’s rule for designing technology: put humans first, not computers — Government Computer News

A d’uh! kind of idea, really.

http://gcn.com/Articles/2011/07/19/wozniak-on-creativity-and-innovation.aspx

Good point. Design with people in mind.

Developers tend to do things that make things easier for themselves than the user, but don’t blame them. Consider not just that there are some developers who want to make life easier for users (and other developers).

But don’t blame developers, they just work here.

The fact is the higher ups always ask how much it’s going to cost. There are always to stick to budgets and they want ROI. They want it quick and they want it accurate and they want it now.

Every OS sucks?

Somebody pull these guys out of their misery and give them an IBM i on Power!

“Every OS Sucks” they say:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d85p7JZXNy8&feature=player_detailpage#t=83s

Don’t clutter the screen

Just read an interesting discussion in one of the blogs at www.acm.org.

On the Importance of Replication in HCI and Social Computing Research, by Ed H. Chi:
http://cacm.acm.org/blogs/blog-cacm/109916-on-the-importance-of-replication-in-hci-and-social-computing-research/fulltext

From the blog:
>
> In the second experiment, when restricted to retrieval tasks rather > than including comparison tasks also, Hyperbolic Browser was faster, > and users appears to learn more of the tree structure than Explorer. >
> What’s interesting is the interpretation of the results suggest that > squeezing more information onto the screen does not improve subject > perceptual and search performance. Instead, the experiment show that > there is a very complex interaction between visual attention/search > with density of information of the display. Under high scent > conditions, information seems to ‘pop out’ in the hyperbolic browser, > helping to achieve higher performance.

Net “neutrality”, search “neutrality”: There’s no such thing

(Proverbs 11:1 ¶A false balance is abomination to the LORD: but a just weight is his delight.)

SHEFFIELD: Google gets hammered by monsters it created – Washington Times
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/jun/30/google-gets-hammered-by-monsters-it-created/

When I first heard of the “net meutrality” concept, it sounded like a good idea on the surface. Bandwidth allocation should be applied in neutral fashion to any downloads. After all, although I almost never download video, it seems unfair for them to make a download slower “just because” it eats up bandwidth. Or because they didn’t like my choice of web page.

I have contributed to “political net neutrality” myself in disgust over a yahoo warning. I know it’s one reason they’ve lost quite a number of search users, because I can’t be the only one.

I ran into the latter with an obviously political warning message from yahoo after clicking on one of the results of a yahoo search. The web page they intervened with said “This web page is not authorized by yahoo”. The warning provided a clickable URL to the target web site, but it disgusted me because it was obviously a way to scare people off from a web page with some information that, let us say it this way, Obama would not people to look at. I knew enough to click through, but I’m sure it kept some people from viewing a video short that was very effective (and factual).

Whatever your political persuasion, you cannot want a search engine that tilts the results in a way you don’t like. It has already cost yahoo some traffic, even though they’re hurting for traffic.

As for Google, I’ve seen convincing evidence that they favor certain views in their ads, that have political implications.

And listen up, leftists: Beware. If you think control freaks that do such stealth filtering and calculating are harmless when you agree with one or another such example, your turn will come. The fist victims of the Bolsheviks were the Mensheviks, who were supposedly their leftist allies. Once Lenin died and Stalin took over, the first ones to reap what they had sewed upon the Christians and the poor of the country, who had helped forge their chains of slavery, the colleagues of Stalin himself, they all got the firing squad for their trouble.

What does this issue have to do with the Internet?

Google is getting a bit of its own medicine in this “search neutrality” campaign, true. In my experience, I know the political and social causes Google has supported (not necessarily all its employees though) and I hate a great many of them.

That said, it is best to let the free market stay free. If it is worth a bunch of money to the biggest companies to spend a lot of money to influence a government decision that affects them, it’s because government has too much power!

If we can cut back that power and take it back OUT of the hands of government and you cut off the chance of companies like Google, or other power-hungry control freaks to rig the system.

The free market brought a variety of companies to the cellular phone market, and competition has driven the introduction of new technologies to that field without any government intervention.

Competition in pricing has been led by MetroPCS into a fair pricing scheme of unlimited voice and message service. Note that there is no “net neutrality” drive on for handheld phones, in part out of the recognition that the technology is different.

In fact AT&T pointed at MetroPCS as a competitor in markets where they offer service in a Congressional hearing I watched on CSpan, and they were still claiming that the cell phone market is local.

So-called anti-monopoly laws that assign arbitrary up-down power to federal employees to approve or disapprove mergers are one of the aspects of the business environment that actually make business easier for bigger companies! Telecom watchdogs cannot but think about what might help or hurt their post-government future, among other things, without even getting into quid pro quos.

Preston Tucker was bested by government intervention, without which he would have made Detroit into the Big Four instead of the Big Three.

Okay, listen up. The first trustworthy search engine that can offer up even half the results as Google, even much less, in the way people expect them to work, will give Google a run for the money.

Hello out there, where are you?