|
This is moderately scary, but the dynamic call hides implementation real well. As long as there is an object by that name available to call, the caller doesn't need to know anything except the argument list. Service programs with sensible export control also come close. It's not the same implementing a Java interface or the things you can do with multiple inheritance in C++. I still agree with everyone else that implementing OO with RPG as it is isn't real practical. > -----Original Message----- > From: Joe Teff [mailto:JoeTeff@earthlink.net] > Sent: Friday, December 01, 2000 1:32 PM > To: RPG400-L@midrange.com > Subject: RE: OO in RPG > > > The best you can do in RPG with encapsulation is data hiding and some > behaviour hiding. OO languages go a step further when they hide > implementatiom. What do you get when you request a result > set? Since it is > actually an interface, it depends on the vendor and how they > implemented it. > Using interfaces and abstract classes hides more than RPG can > and allows you > to implement much more scalable, maintainable and enhanceable > solutions. > > Joe Teff > +--- | This is the RPG/400 Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to RPG400-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to RPG400-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to RPG400-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 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.