RE: iPhone Rich UI

Hi Nathan

I have to say I felt Joe's responses were reasonable in context. It was
clear from the outset that the additional functionality came from the EGL
framework.

I don't think it was anywhere near as clear from Aaaron's post that you had
to acquire the RPG XML Toolkit that he provides. (and if I have mis-spoken
that feel free to correct me). I don't recall Aaron qualifying himself as a
vendor of a toolkit or qualifying his code statements to say they required
his tool kit.

In that context Aaron asking Joe to provide the additional code was akin to
asking him to provide the code for an EXFMT while hiding his own code behind
subroutines.

The difference was only clear if you "knew" how Aaron was doing it. On the
Web-400 mailing list or even the RPG mailing list there's a better chance
that most people would have known this but less so on the midrange-l list.

Like others I've had my moments with Joe (!) but in this case I think he did
a pretty fair job.

Regards
Evan Harris


-----Original Message-----
From: midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:midrange-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nathan Andelin
Sent: Wednesday, 30 July 2008 1:35 a.m.
To: Midrange Systems Technical Discussion
Subject: Re: iPhone Rich UI

Joe Pluta wrote:
Too many examples on the list of late have used proprietary
internal frameworks and frankly that's not showing anybody
anything.

To be fair, I didn't understand either code sample. But from a
programming point of view, I don't see much difference between methods
evoked from class libraries vs procedures evoked from service programs.

I suppose your real point is that one is backed by IBM, and more likely
to gain wider acceptance, while the other is backed by Aaron Bartell.
If that's your point, I see it, but personally side more with the Aaron
for several reasons. First, I'd rather run native code. Second, I'd
rather develop in RPG. Third, I relate better with small companies.

Nathan.