|
Paul, Your file maintenance utility has inspired me. I'm considering writing a generic component in RPG, not for maintaining, but for browsing files. I can envision exporting an api such as the following: fileReference = browseClass_Open(Library:File:Member) browseClass_SetFileReference(fileReference) browseClass_ListFromTop(recordCount) browseClass_ListNext(recordCount) browseClass_ListPrevious(recordCount) browseClass_ListFromBottom(recordCount) browseClass_ListFromKey(key:recordCount) ... browseClass_Other() I don't think I'd want to bite off generic add, change, and delete procedures, because such actions are generally subject to complex business rules that would need to be overridden and adapted to individual circumstance anyway. There are more similarities between ILE and OO languages than most people realize. For object instantiation in RPG: Eval myInstance = myClass_New(parameters) Callp myClass_doSomething(myInstance: parameters) Where myInstance would be a pointer to a data structure containing instance properties, which would be referenced from myClass procedure calls. For inheritance in RPG, create a new module, either importing and wrapping the procedures in a base module, or create a new module containing just procedure overrides, then bind to both modules. For polymorphism in RPG, define data exports in modules, supplementing procedure interfaces, which alter the behavior of procedures based on data content. It's true that most RPG programmers wouldn't consider following OO design patterns, unless they first immersed themselves in OO languages for a period of years. But I returned to RPG for both performance as well as productivity reasons. Nathan. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- message: 1 date: Wed, 17 Mar 2004 11:11:23 -0800 from: "Paul Holm" <pholm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> subject: Strategic Java Usage/Productivity Nathan/All Thanks for the clarification of your points. The point I was trying to make is that Java and its OO capability can lead to much much higher levels of productivity than procedural and RPG languages in both utilities and application development projects. I am not an RPG expert so I might be missing something(s), please excuse/correct me if I'm off. The flexibility and productivity possible via inheritance, polymorphism, frameworks, and interfaces would be very difficult or impossible to match with procedural languages. I agree that performance can be an issue with complex objects but that all depends on the object/framework design in my experience. Frameworks and components; that's where I enjoy spending most of my time, especially since I can't afford to golf daily which is my other passion</sigh>. Inquiry objects with inherited "maintenance" method for insert, update, delete, copy can carry minimal overhead and the payback is huge in terms of programmer productivity. For example, I built and deployed, an additional inquiry operation which returns a completely generic Java component with inherited but overridable maintenance methods (insert, update, delete, copy) and it performs very well. This "department" inquiry was developed and deployed in 45 seconds using a set of Java components. That's where I think AS400 shops and others can benefit from OO and Java technology. http://www.planetjavainc.com/wow60/runApp?id=298 Java methods are attached to the class so even multiple instances of the components have much less overhead than people suspect. For example, in addition to the inherited maintenance methods, the framework/component also inherits: MS EXCEL, XML, web services, dynamic field level security and validation, dynamic associations for linking files to other files, column level sorting (black triangles), dynamic column headers, and several other features. All features inherited, customizable, to any database, on any platform with zero programming effort needed; all in 45 seconds. That's what Java and OO/frameworks can provide. As far as the XML to HTML performance, I haven't worked with it too much but I imagine having to parse and regenerate the UI on the fly could be expensive; I don't know enough about that to comment. Have a good ne. -Paul Holm
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.