Steve Richter wrote:

>Encapsulating a string in a class enables techniques like automatic type
>conversion ( ascii to ebcdic to unicode ), all the other string functions
>( scan, replace, concat ). Cpu is cheap ( or it should be ).   ( Also the
>C++ template functionality works well with classes and functions )
>
Which has nothing to do with the issue. I didn't say to not use OO
techniques. I said to implement the object methods using MI calls rather
than CPU brute force. I only suggested that because you indicated that
this new "modern" approach was less efficient than the old approach.

>Once you start trying to optimize and mix programing models you really start
>to muck things up. Either program the RPG way or the OOP way.
>
What? Are you saying that OOP methods are dependent on being implemented
in some form? Isn't that exactly the opposite of OOP theory? So if I
went through the standard libraries and replaced string object methods
with methods that used the MI calls, then C++ wouldn't work any more?

>Steve Richter
>

--
Chris Rehm
javadisciple@earthlink.net

Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one
that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God. 1 John 4:7





As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This thread ...

Replies:

Follow On AppleNews
Return to Archive home page | Return to MIDRANGE.COM home page

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 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.