RE: framework question

I am not putting words into your mouth, I am just trying to get accurate
answers.  If you don't like my synonyms of your statements so be it. 

>All I said was that name spaces can be done just as EASILY in RPG.
This is absolutely not true and I can see your lack of use in the RPG
*SrvPgm arena if you do not see a definite need for namespace enhancement.
If it is not on the top of your priority list that is fine because we all
know that RPG has a lot of area's in need of improvement, but to say "...can
be done just as EASILY in RPG" is only true if you are 'doing simple RPG
modules'.

That is all I have to say.  I don't want to waste your time.

Aaron Bartell

-----Original Message-----
From: java400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:java400-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Joe Pluta
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2004 9:24 AM
To: 'Java Programming on and around the iSeries / AS400'
Subject: RE: framework question

> From: Bartell, Aaron L. (TC)
> 
> Joe, I am just trying to counter your quick reply's that RPG is as
elegant
> in the namespace arena as Java.

Aaron, I never said that.  It really gets to be a waste of time talking with
you when you start sticking words in my mouth, and then arguing with them!
All I said was that name spaces can be done just as EASILY in RPG.  Where
you got "RPG is as elegant in the namespace arena as Java" is utterly beyond
me.  In case you haven't figured it out yet, elegance in code is not very
high on my scale of requirements.  You want elegance?  Take up ballroom
dancing.


> I am trying to get facts, not off the cuff opinions, because our shop 
> is making serious considerations of moving
to
> Java (for where it fits).

Facts about what?  Style or substance?  I already explained in great,
nattering detail where I prefer RPG and why, with concrete reasoning.
You come back with "it's not as nice".  Sorry, but you're the one with the
off the cuff blanket statements.


> >From the small amount of Java I have done and the large amount of RPG
> *SrvPgms, I can say that the two do not have even close to the same 
> "namespace" concept.

And as I said before, who cares?  If you take even a small amount of time
with your naming, you can create your own namespace with little or no
trouble.  The package concept of Java is better, sure, but its overkill for
RPG today.

Unless Charles' concept of huge libraries of third-party RPG comes to pass,
you're just as well off creating your own name space.

Anyway, there's no right or wrong answer here, and I'm not going to get
sucked into another elegance debate.  It's pointless.  You want namespaces,
great.  Vive la elegance!

Joe