Re: open source rpg compiler

[Hans Boldt <boldt@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Again, Eric provided some good answers to your questions. So I'll 
just add a few new points.

Bartell, Aaron L. (TC) wrote:
> I think RPG would have to make an attempt at being OO before you could say
> it is never a good idea.  Don't take this personally, but trying to use
> newer technologies with RPG is kludgy right now.

The best and easiest to use OO languages are OO through and through. 
That is, everything is an object. For example, in Python, even 
classes and functions are objects. Merge OO features into compiled 
procedural languages, and you end up with a mish-mash. C++ is the 
extreme example of that. Java is much better than C++, but still 
there are some data types are language primitives and not actually 
objects.

As far as trying to use newer technologies with RPG, if RPG is a 
poor fit, then by all means use a different tool. For many newer 
technologies, piling enhancements onto a traditional, compiled, 
procedural language like RPG isn't always the best way to work.

> You don't have to start from ground zero of an application architecture to
> get immediate gains with OO.  Yes your software might be re-written over
> time, but you don't have to do a complete re-write.

Well, you can take the C++ approach and learn individual OO features 
one at a time. But you still wouldn't be doing OO design and 
programming. It's not like moving from a fixed form RPG to a free 
form RPG. It's a whole different way of thinking. It's practically 
like a different religion, where even fundamental concepts of 
reality may be different.

Cheers! Hans