|
> I'd love to hear other's opinions on this, especially anyone who's done > production Java and RPG/ILE (real ILE) programming on similar systems. Hmm Im not a programmer, but do have some experience in both types of projects. In this case we're talking about two projects running in the same organisation. They do deal with different areas of the business, but they were both large projects. (a) The OO code quality exceeded the procedural. In fact so much that the value of this alone outweighed the re-use value. So I think your units may be right from a programmer measurement, but I think they get closer when you add test/fix resources. (b) In the project there is a tendancy to overuse inheritance. The impact of such is there is considerable loss of flexibility. Business changes can/do break the model which causes significant impact. (c) The tools are not a substitution for skilled people. I've seen a few comments about the identification of recurring code as being an indication of pattern recognition. While thats true I think patterns at the design level are far more effective that patterns at the code level. (d) The OO work was much easier to implement a staggered delivery approach based on function than the RPG approach. Users got access to working business function faster than the RPG development. So while the effort may be greater, I think the overall elapsed time to delivery is potentially reduced. (Since the projects dealt in different domains, this is really a gut feelling more than fact) (e) In our case we found tools for managing the development process to be more mature in the ILE environment. We needed to employ a number of toolsmiths to support the application development process. (Note the Java is fat client application deployed within an organisation across a number of geographic locations. So some of the infrastructure is required simply for sw distribution. This would not be the case in a JSP framework, but this projected started 3 years ago so JSP was not an option. ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________ > but don't miss out on the fact that one's procedures (functions, > classes, whatever your favourite term) can and should be cross-application. It may be semantics but I would disagree with this statement. IMO classes/functions really are too granualar for cross application requirements. I think there are different levels of granuality 1. Objects 2. Components 3. Services 4. E-Services. Typically a service oriented framework would be more suited to cross/inter applications within an organisation. With an e-service being cross orgranisation (example would be HP's E-Speak) > I fight every day to get programmers to stop thinking about "this program" > or "this problem" but to expect that somebody else could use the routine. > Broaden one's outlook, so to speak. It takes only a little more time to > make the function more generic and the payback can be huge. IMO This is a management problem. Typically projects are expected to deliver their function as fast and cheep as possible. And that is counter to the approach of taking time and effort to build a more generic/interoperable service. I dont disagree that it only takes slightly more effort and there are rewards to the organisation. Its just you need to somehow inbuild that into the project management framework. > Because the I/O is handled as parameters, > you can be 100% certain that code changes won't break other code. That's a huge plus. Devils advocate: But then the impact on retesting is huge if you change the common function. !!! The impact of cross domain dependecies can be significant delays. Just pointing out that your implementation plans need to accomodate a phased use of newer versions of common services. While this can be through duplication of code or by including a version ID in the interaction. I very rarely see it done in the interaction, more people tend to end up with different code levels in production. +--- | 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 +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.