Re: Replacing IIS with iSeries 400

-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Pluta <joepluta@PlutaBrothers.com>
To: midrange-l@midrange.com <midrange-l@midrange.com>
Date: 02 October 2001 17:42
Subject: RE: Replacing IIS with iSeries 400


>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: MDC Information Systems
>>
>> Joe,
>>
>> I'm quite calm re the technical stuff, I'm waving my arms and shouting
>> because this is exactly the type of generalization that YOU would not
>> accept.
>
>I always attack bogus generalizations with facts, Mike.  Let's see yours.
>
>
>> While you use 'rarely' & 'chances are' later in your paragraph the clear
>> message of  the opening sentence is 'don't look at a 4GL' (and
>> remember this
>> is a recommendation to someone who asked an innocent question).
>
>No, my comment was that a 4GL is my personal choice of last resort.  Always
>has been, always will be, for the reasons I outlined.  Don't start putting
>words in my mouth.  I hate that.
>

Joe, I'm sorry you're so upset you hate my reply.  I can only interpert what
I read, not what you intend to imply.

>
>> Your responses (re code generators, not 4GLs) confirms to me that you are
>> not talking from a position of knowledge on this subject.
>
>Oh man, I hate when people insist that their tool of choice is a "4GL"
>rather than a code generator.  What exactly makes your tool not a code
>generator?  Unless it's a very sophisticated optimizer, similar to those
>used in compilers, the tool is a code generator.  Unless you use flow
>analysis to remove unnecessary code, you're just generating template-based
>3GL code.  To be honest, I don't know which LANSA does these days, but the
>last time I looked nobody had a true 4GL.
>

Wow,  you do hate my replies,  this is only a mailing list, calm down. For
sake of clarity, and with respect to the companies concerned, I would for
example, classify ProGen as a code generator and PowerHouse, Synon &
Progress as 4GLs (but not in the same league as LANSA) and yes, I have
worked with them. I cannot comment on your product, which you promoted in
the original mail, as I have neither worked with it nor evaluated it. My
point is that there is a difference regardless of what you may think.
>
>> IMHO
>> your issues 1
>> to 6 don't merit comment as they to not relate to modern 4GLs.
>
>It's easy to say that they don't merit comment when you can't comment on
>them.

Joe, I choose not to comment on them. I am quite capable of comment but I
think it's all been said before. I'm of the school of thought that says 'if
the gain exceeds the pain' and costs less then I'm in.

> LANSA doesn't generate any unnecessary moves?  I find that difficult
>to believe.  Your field names are nice and readable, and so is the
generated
>code?  You have round trip regeneration?
>

What generated code? I've never looked ar a line of it other than than at a
demo. My JSPs and HTML do not get effected by recomplies unless I choose,
why do I need regeneration?


>Or is it your position that LANSA will generate all the code I ever need,
>and I'll never have to touch it?  If that's the case, then more power to
>you, but you'd never be able to generate the types of code I write.

Spot on, why walk if you have a car? (sorry, auto)

>Remember that I write lots of middleware, which requires very low-level
>programming.  I've never found any code generation tool that can keep up
>with my requirements.

I have no idea what you write, my comments were only in the context of the
original mail, which I think we've strayed from and our current debate will
be of little help to Don. (We don't need to write the middleware, it's in
LANSA for multiple platforms).

>  For example, how well do you support IFS stream
>files?
Very well
  Complex APIs?
Yes
  Pointers?
Yes
  Can you write a condition handler in
>LANSA?
Yes
  A database trigger?
Yes
>
>On the other hand, it's quite possible that for business application code,
>LANSA may be good enough.  I haven't tried to write an MRP generation in
>LANSA, or a bill of materials explosion, which are two of my tests, so I'm
>not sure.
>

But I thought you hadn't used LANSA at all? to be honest I haven't tried
BOMs or MRP in LANSA either so I can't comment on those but we have
developed some pretty complex web based systems, standalone and with and
full legacy system integration.

>
>> Finally, your 2 panel question can be easily handled in LANSA using 'on
>> condition' logic and never looking at a line of generated code (and the
>> dropdown list can be dynamic from DB2).
>
>Great.  Show us the code that would do this.

Why? do you not believe me? Why not try it yourself? I beleive there is a
FOC developer deal in the US.

> Of course the data has to come
>from a DB2 file.  Not only that, the condition is based on the number of
>records retrieved from the database.  Be sure that the field is returned
>even if it's constant (which would likely mean a disabled text field,
>although for the sake of a nice look, you might want to instead use a text
>string and a hidden input field).


So?  we could handle it in any no. of ways also.
>
>Joe
>

Anyhow, in summary I feel your initial generalization re 4GLs is misguided;
obviously I will not be able to change you mind as it's pretty well made up.
Looking back at your initial response to Don I'm now struck by how close you
product 'promo' is to the early ads. for LANSA for The Web, maybe we're not
a million miles apart after all.

Mike.
>_______________________________________________
>This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
>To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
>To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
>visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
>or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
>Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
>at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.
>
>