RE: Web apps on the AS/400

Leif, we have substantive differences which simply won't be hashed out here,
or perhaps anywhere.  If you think a stateful subroutine is the same as a
class, then we have no common ground for discussion.  If you think a COBOL
file I/O module is equivalent to a class, you might have a point, except
that the file is persistent and can be acted upon by programs outside the
I/O module.  Unless you fully enforce through some sort of corporate
standard that the file is only accessible through the module, then you do
not have a class.  The idea of a class is that it represents a set of data
that can only be acted upon through the methods of the class.  Now, anything
that can be done in Java can be done in other languages, but OO techniques
are easier - and ENFORCEABLE - in Java.

> where the new class "do_it" does it (whatever it is).
> And, holy macaroni, guess what: I can change do_it to do
> something completely different WITHOUT changing my program.

This is where we're going to have to differ.  You either don't understand
OO, or you're purposely trivializing it.  The point of my argument is that
if one class does a bunch of stuff and uses a second class, referring to it
by interface, and then you substitute a different class that still adheres
to the interface, you can change the output of the first class without
changing the code.  That is a beautiful simplicity and elegance that is
difficult to achieve any other way.  If you don't see it, then this
discussion has no further merit for either of us, or I'm sure for anyone
else on this list.

> The way to promote Java is not to claim that it is the holy grail, but
> to point out that can be a powerful tool to take its place alongside
> with all the other ones to use when the situation and circumstances
> warrant it.

And I've said all along: Java is wonderful for UI, RPG is best for business
logic.  Of course, you won't "touch" RPG either, so we've got less and less
in common.  I'll continue on writing business applications my way, and you
design your code your way, and we'll just have to leave it at that.

I'm saddened and disappointed by your attitude.  You have to be purposely
missing the points here.  Multiple entry points in a polymorphic class are
not "non-structured".  I/O modules are not classes.  Writing a new "do_it"
is not polymorphism.  If you insist on seeing things that way, great, but we
have nothing to say that will benefit one another.

And that, I think, is a shame.

Joe

+---
| This is the Midrange System Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com
+---