Re: OO benefits? (was Re: Fast400 Value to iSeries community is less than zero )

[rob@xxxxxxxxx]

I don't buy that using something other than CALL is not as robust.
Especially after I looked up the word in the dictionary again.  There are
numerous performance reasons for using data queing and the like versus
CALL.  And this is stuff that has been used IN PRACTICE and not just theory
for years.  I am tired of coding for morons.  I've known people who did not
know how to use a SETLL or a CHAIN in RPG.  Wrote everything using read
loops until they got the desired record.  Does this mean we should code for
this level of personnel?  He!! no!  Many people would like the challenge of
doing something different or learning a new technique.

Rob Berendt

==================
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin



                    "Steve Richter"
                    <srichter@AutoCoder       To:     <midrange-l@midrange.com>
                    .com>                     cc:
                    Sent by:                  Fax to:
                    midrange-l-admin@mi       Subject:     Re: OO benefits? 
(was Re: Fast400 Value to iSeries community
                    drange.com                 is    less    than zero )


                    11/17/2001 11:35 AM
                    Please respond to
                    midrange-l







----- Original Message -----
From: <thomas@inorbit.com>

>I have no disagreement as far as that goes. However, to put this into a
"business >programmer" context, how do you propose to resolve the problem
by
using the pgm call >approach when it takes 100CPW interactive and you only
are given 50CPW by your >management and there's 500CPW batch not being
used?
Suddenly the number of >steps that must be known by the programmer goes way
beyond the basic 4, though it >can be limited if they use a C/S approach
instead.

Tom,

That is my larger point. I am stating that the pgm call, when applicable,
whether intra or inter system, is the cleanest, less details for the pgmr,
most system architecture features supported way for a client to access a
server. But IBM's pricing and use of CFINT underpowers the interactive
capacity of the system, causing appl designers to not use the module call
method,  resulting in less robust, more costly applications on our system.

Steve Richter



_______________________________________________
This is the Midrange Systems Technical Discussion (MIDRANGE-L) mailing list
To post a message email: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com
To subscribe, unsubscribe, or change list options,
visit: http://lists.midrange.com/cgi-bin/listinfo/midrange-l
or email: MIDRANGE-L-request@midrange.com
Before posting, please take a moment to review the archives
at http://archive.midrange.com/midrange-l.