RE: Aaron Bartell's RPG/Java comparison -- JAVA400-L

Actually, Brad, you're about as wrong as you can get, in my opinion.  Yes, you 
can solve any programming problem in any language that has certain basic 
features.  This has been proven mathematically.  However, some languages are 
FAR better at certain types of problems than other languages.

For example, there are certain specialized languages that are designed to 
handle unique requirements, such as process control or parallel processing.  
While I could do the same thing in RPG, I'd be a blithering idiot to do so.  
Instead, I should always try to use the language best suited for the job at 
hand.

For text-based output and processing of variable amounts of data, RPG performs 
quite poorly compared to languages such as PERL, Java and even Basic.  On the 
other hand, for direct access to and manipulation of disk-based business data, 
RPG has no peer.  The ability to directly add two numbers after reading a 
database, with no programmatic conversion, is a pretty unique characteristic, 
and is why RPG is lights years ahead of just about any other language.  As a 
side note, SQL can do the data access bit, but falls apart when it comes to 
navigation, but that's a different issue.

JSP and servlets talking via some sort of messaging mechanism to an RPG 
back-end is a FAR BETTER mechanism than RPG-CGI for a properly separated UI/BL 
environment.  This is because maintaining and modifying the format of the HTML 
within your compiled program is difficult at best.  Even through the use of 
Java, there are issues about release compatibility that will require new 
adapters to be written, but the amount of work to do that in a properly 
implemented OO solution is far less than the non-OO service program interface 
of ILE.

I was programming in Java for a year and a half before I began to even dimly 
understand the power of a true object-oriented approach.  Only after writing 
hundreds of thousands of lines of code do I now consider myself even competent. 
 So before you start trash-talking Java as "theory" vs. "reality", write some 
real code.  Perhaps you'll then have gained some insight into the OO world, and 
if nothing else, you'll have earned the right to take your potshots.



---------- Original Message ----------------------------------
From: "Stone, Brad V (TC)" <bvstone@taylorcorp.com>
Reply-To: JAVA400-L@midrange.com
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2001 14:06:59 -0600

>Right.  So you're supporting my point that the langauge used has little to
do with it and the programming does.  Also, Java doesn't solve these
problems, which is why it is more theory that reality.  In theory, you can
do all this wonderfull stuff with Java.  In reality, rarely does it get done
that way.  The same applies for any language.

+---
| This is the JAVA/400 Mailing List!
| To submit a new message, send your mail to JAVA400-L@midrange.com.
| To subscribe to this list send email to JAVA400-L-SUB@midrange.com.
| To unsubscribe from this list send email to JAVA400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com.
| Questions should be directed to the list owner: joe@zappie.net
+---