Re: EGL: Integration or Migration?

Aaron wrote:

I think John was getting to the point of saying you could use an OO language
to code modular and use the cool language features like overloading and
overriding that are missing from RPG to get to an endpoint quicker.

No, what i tried to say was that OO is a big step furhter than "modular". You
not have a re-usable package of only code (with data flowing though) but
you have a re-usable package consisting of data (which is central to any
app) and associated code. The packages are therefore much more
self-contained and thus re-usable than traditional modules. Things like over-
loading etc are nice features but not that important. Even inheritance
is not important. Its simply a next step in the ability to express abstractions.
And expression abstractions (the right one) is fundamental to programming,
especiallty when programming large and complex systems.

----------------------------------------

Date: Fri, 6 Jun 2008 07:57:39 -0500
From: aaronbartell@xxxxxxxxx
To: egl-i@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [EGL-i] EGL: Integration or Migration?

Again, I'm not saying that OO is a bad thing. I'm just saying that it has

its place in the programmer's toolkit like everything else, and I don't find
that place to be writing business rules.

I follow you and I agree. Your response to John makes good sense because
building an OO heirarchy for a few cases will definitely cause maintenance
headaches later on. I think what I am wondering is what if you were to use
Java like you use RPG, where you would essentially have a class with
methods, similar to a *MODULE with sub procs. If we dismiss syntax for a
brief moment, then I think they can offer comparable solutions.

I think John was getting to the point of saying you could use an OO language
to code modular and use the cool language features like overloading and
overriding that are missing from RPG to get to an endpoint quicker.

One of the things I have found with Java vs. RPG is that the Java
development approach likes to have an entire projects worth of classes
checked out so it can compile effectively, where as with RPG, as long as you
have the prototype you can compile. I am guessing this is where Java class
loaders would come into play (have used them very little), but that would be
slightly messy and is an advantage of RPG over Java IMO.

Thoughts?

Aaron Bartell
http://mowyourlawn.com
--
This is the EGL on and around the IBM i (EGL-i) mailing list
To post a message email: EGL-i@xxxxxxxxxxxx
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/mailman/listinfo/egl-i
or email: EGL-i-request@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/egl-i.

_________________________________________________________________
De leukste online filmpjes vind je op MSN Video!
http://video.msn.com/video.aspx?mkt=nl-nl