> Do we need a new programming paradigm, to solve today's business problems... > IMV, the CW is sadly mistaken on this point. With abundant due respect to > Joe, and just about everybody else: In my experience these new paradigms > cause one overwhelmingly significant problem, which overrides any possible > benefit they might, and DO, have... Only the best of the best can make > EFFECTIVE use of these "new" paradigms. One of these "new" paradigms, OO, > has been around for 20 years or more... If it was the sliced bread and can > of peas, more people would have become proficient enough for it to have made > a signficant dent in the programming bottle-neck. I haven't observed that. > IMV, it's just not a SIGNIFICANTLY SUPERIOR method of doing modular > programming, to make it the panacea it's billed as. > > Again, IMV, modular code--> "it's a good thing" (tm). New paradigms--> each > gets more complex and adds more layers of abstraction. The KEY (in my > experience) is getting code to model the business AS CLOSELY AS POSSIBLE, > and TOO many layers of abstraction are MUCH WORSE than TOO few. (I'm still > formulating views on what that "right level of abstraction" is, BTW.) Did you ever visit http://www.400times.co.uk/Documents/ERROS1.htm Here is an example of using the power of DB2 business rules to solve today's business challenges ... manage the complexity of ERP at below PC prices. ERROS has very few customers, not because the concept is no good, but because it is thinking outside the box that most people have locked themselves into. MacWheel99@aol.com (Alister Wm Macintyre) (Al Mac) BPCS 405 CD Manager / Programmer @ Global Wire Technologies Incorporated http://www.globalwiretechnologies.com = new name same quality wire engineering company: fax # 812-424-6838
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.