Re: Adoption of RPG OA (Summary)

[Joe Pluta <joepluta@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 3/18/2011 5:23 PM, Joe Pluta wrote:
> I see definite benefit in RPG OA as a workstation replacement.  I would
> have loved this about 10 years ago<grin>.  If you get a side benefit of
> using READ and WRITE instead of CALL, more power to you, but again I
> consider that very much a niche application.  I'm just not the type to
> use a WRITE statement when a CALL will do.  It's the same reason I'm not
> a big fan of using triggers for business logic.

And in case I'm not clear here, this is purely my opinion.  Rob has been 
very successful in incorporating triggers as an essential part of his 
architecture.  How you use a technology is when you move from fact to 
opinion.

For example, the 5250 modernization discussion is a factual one.  I was 
concerned that RPG OA couldn't handle the INFDS, but it can - hypothesis 
put forth, facts presented.  I was wrong and I happily concede the 
technical capability of the feature in that role.

As to using RPG OA as a generalized interface, that's more of an 
opinion, like triggers.  If you find it useful, that's excellent.  I 
won't be using it; I don't have a situation where a CALL isn't as good 
or better an option than a WRITE to a virtual file.  Well, I take that 
back - we have a Java server that actually would work pretty well as the 
back end of an RPG OA driver.  But a prototyped call works just fine and 
it doesn't cost extra.

Joe