RE: framework question

["Joe Pluta" <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Charles said: 

> Not quite Joe.  You are apparently an old-time hack programmer from
way
> back whose only coding criteria is does it work, was it quick to do,
> and did I do it in RPG.
> 
> I on the other hand prefer to engineer a  proper solution to a
customers
> business problem that will provide the flexibility they need now and
in
> the future.  Very little I do is theoretical Joe.
> 
> Now we can continue with the snide personal comments, we can drop the
> thread, or we can continue the discussion.  It's up to you Joe.

Charles, you're carrying the snide ball here, buddy.  You just lumped my
25 years of multi-language experience into the phrase "old-time hack
programmer", just because I disagree with your attempt to lump
procedural application development into OO.  And you call my techniques
which work just fine in the real world "an improper solution."  My
software is running in thousands of sites around the world - I guess I
have a LOT of calls to make to explain to them they've been using an
improper solution all these years.
 
Oh.  By the way.  I've already designed and developed two successful
Java-based iSeries products.  In fact, mine was the FIRST Java-based
commercial product ever released for the iSeries.  I've written books on
putting JSP front-ends on monolithic code and on using Eclipse, as well
as one coming out on WDSC.  I have a Webcast coming up on Search400 on
the topic in a few weeks, and I regularly teach JSP and servlet labs at
iSeries DevCon.  I don't THINK my only coding criteria is "did I do it
in RPG".

On the other hand, YOURS seems to be "if it's not OO, it's bad."  You
may not believe this, Charles, but OO is just another programming
technique, neither better nor worse than any other in and of itself.
There are things OO does well and things it doesn't do well.

But hey, call me snide, I don't care.  But it seems to ME that I'm the
more open one here.  I at least respect the fact that there are places
for OO and procedural.  You, on the other hand, seem to think anybody
who doesn't shoehorn every problem into OO is a backwater hick.  I find
that attitude rather droll.

Joe