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

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 ...


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

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2022 by 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.