RE: Please vote for Syntax check in /FREE!

["John Taylor" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

JT,

> Overloading is a feature of *most all* OO languages, unless 
> I'm mistaken (and I may be).  Now, from a strictly technical 
> DEFINITION of OO languages, I'm sure you're correct that it 
> is not a REQUIREMENT.  So, if RPG had operator overloading, 
> would (or would it not) be an OO language...??

You need to spend some time familiarizing yourself with these concepts
before you begin to debat them.

1) RPG already has some operator overloading:

        eval myNumber = firstNumber + secondNumber
        eval myString = firstString + secondString

Just to be clear, the operator is the "+" sign.


2) What everyone is excited about is procedure overloading, not operator
overloading.


3) Neither one of those things makes RPG an OO language. 


> All that merely evades discussion of my point, however, which 
> is:  Why does RPG need to become OO in the first place.  See 
> Mr. Greenspun's article on Java, if you didn't.

Relax, JT. Hans has made his position on this issue abundantly clear on
many occasions. He has no desire to see an OO RPG language. He's in
AGREEMENT with you. 


Regards,

John Taylor