Re: Richard Schoen Sep 2008 System iNews OP

Scott,

Thanks for that clarification.

It seems to me, if I wrote an article called "Why I like OPM", but it was
all about how good SYNON was and how SYNON made OPM better, then I would
think the article misled me a little. Now, if Richard had written "Why I
like .NET" and tried to pitch VB as the best solution, I would also be as
confused. But he didn't.

My concern is that there is a misrepresentation of EGL. When an article on
Java EE ends with: "That's why I believe EGL and RDi SOA comprise the next
great development tool for the i." then I think the purpose of the article
was to sell EGL, not promote Java EE.

One of the big problems is terminology, of course. I think you explained the
Java vs Java EE concept best. Now, if there were only an article about Java
EE that I could read...

Thanks so much,
Trevor


On 9/4/08 4:48 AM, "Scott Klement" <midrange-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Hi Trevor,

But, like I said, SYNON was never called RPG, even though SYNON generated
RPG. But it is ok to call EGL Java because it generates Java? Call it COBOL,
instead. A salespitch for EGL that is called "why I like Java" is a
misrepresentation of EGL, and that does not help the iCommunity.

Hmmmm... I was under the impression that "Java EE" (previously known as
J2EE) is not the LANGUAGE, but rather the ENVIRONMENT in which programs
run. Just as RPG IV runs in the ILE environment, RPG III runs in the
OPM environment, C#, VB.NET, ASP.NET all run in the .NET environment, etc.

I'm not familiar with Synon... so for this discussion, I'll assume it
generates RPG/400 (RPG III) code. RPG/400 code runs in the OPM
environment, right?

So I'd say referring to EGL in an article titled "Why I Like Java EE" is
analogous to referring to Synon in an article titled "Why I Like OPM"...
and that seems valid to me.

Of course, I'm not really a Java expert, so I might have the terminology
wrong. :)