Yes, I didn't think to put it that way at first but it's a good way of phrasing it: In OO coding I'm creating a number of packages, and I find its easier to organize their interactions (and to remember how they must interact) when I do it that way.
--- Bob Bridges, [email protected], cell 336 382-7313 /* Well-timed silence is the most commanding expression. -Mark Helprin in The Wall Street Journal */ -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Charles Mills Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2022 19:59 Let me jump in here with a very personal note and say I *have* written a very successful* mainframe program in a totally OO paradigm. So yes, OO is totally relevant to mainframe software. To me, yes, it is a method of organization of data and subroutines. It is a totally different way of thinking about things. Let me see if I can express this. You have a program. You want to add some functionality to it. Rather than thinking separately "I will need some new data fields" and "I will need some new subroutines" instead you think "I will need a 'package' of new data fields and subroutines that operate on those fields." It is a way of organizing the effort that I found to work extremely well for me. I cannot picture writing a large program any other way: not as a hodgepodge of fields and subroutines, but rather as a collection of smallish 'packages' of data and their attendant subroutines. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
