Re: Classes/Objects compared to SRVPGMs

[Tommy.Holden@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]

my one and only statement regarding this whole subject....they both have 
their purpose.  one is not *better* than the other but instead they 
complement each other.  each language has it's strong suits, using both 
languages leveraging their strengths is the best possible scenario.  Java 
is great for GUI rendering and lightweight UI in general, RPG is great for 
business processing, tie them together and you've got a great team.

Thanks,
Tommy Holden



From:
Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To:
RPG programming on the AS400 / iSeries <rpg400-l@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
06/20/2008 08:07 AM
Subject:
Re: Classes/Objects compared to SRVPGMs



Takken, Cor wrote:
> What I do want to point out - and yes, I will keep on hammering about
> that ;) - is that 'old fashioned' programming styles (what we are used
> to and love in RPG, Cobol, C and what have you in that area) can never
> be compared in functionality and use to OO programming styles with the
> whole concept of inheritance and reuse through classes/objects and what
> have you which is used in Smalltalk, Java, C++ and the likes.
I'm not going to get too far down this particular alley, because it's a 
blind one, but the idea that OO programming is inherently better than 
procedural is a topic that's been beaten to death here, Cor.  The 
suitability of a giving programming technique for a given purpose 
depends a lot upon the programmer, but the idea that RPG can't provide 
code reuse is simply untrue.

We can argue all day about whether inheritance is actually a benefit - 
the OO experts seems to be leaning more towards composition rather than 
inheritance as it becomes clear that complex object hierarchies lead to 
brittle software - but at the end of the day, the trick is productivity 
and procedural programming still has its place.

To insist otherwise is to have never written business logic with a good 
procedural programmer.

Joe