Re: EGL: Integration or Migration?

john e wrote:

I object to Joe's constant referring to OO as not suitable for business code as it is not
able to react to change easily is because it is utter Bogus, and i suspect Joe knows that.

You suspect wrong. I firmly believe that procedural is better than OO for business rules. It's my opinion, backed up by years of experience. You can disagree, but I'd love to see proof. Again, I simply refer you back to the ill-fated San Francisco project to show how OO does not always map well to business issues. That's why there is no traction for OO SQL.

Also, I'm not saying it can't be done. I'm not saying that a group of dedicated, expert OO programmers can't build a business system. I am saying that a group of decent, work-a-day RPG programmers could do the job quicker and end up with a result that runs better and is easier to maintain.

And that may be part of the problem: in order to create an OO application, you need OO experts from the beginning. And to create an OO business system, you need OO experts who understand business. And there are lots of RPG programmers who understand business. Lots of RPG programmers started out as business people who showed an aptitude for logic; it's quite easy to teach procedural languages to logical people.

Anyway, you can go on for years about this. This is the last that I'm going to argue OO vs. procedural in this list. If you want to argue the merits of Java, it's best done in JAVA400-L. This list is about EGL, and since EGL generates OO code from procedural syntax, it's good to agree to disagree on the merits of the two and move on.

Joe