On 6/1/05, Leon Rosenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: *snip* > Would you be able to code them with c? Forget it.
Actually, I suspect that alot of these have been coded with C/C++. > What we have had was mostly alpha-numeric based terminals (remember borlands > gdi?) with maybe 10-20 business functions. > Now, a pissy web-portal has more functionallity then the whole supercalc > suite. I think that I doubt this assertion. > Nostalgic talking about old times is ok, but you shouldn't forget reality... I work with reality every day. > And talking about "complicated" and "simplicity"... What is simplier to > read, 10 classes a 20 lines java code, or 5000 lines of assembler code doing > the same? Now, I don't know what the accepted conversion factor is for Java to assembler, but I think that this question/comparison is flawed. As a technical lead, if you show me ten classes each containing only 20 lines of code, then you'd better be prepared to explain yourself. I'm all for using the OO aspects of Java, but not at the expense of clear, concise code. Most less-experienced Java developers have too many objects, especially for their logic. I hate crawling around a million objects with short methods where the thread bounces around between them and leaves you feeling cross-eyed by the time you get it figured out. Simon --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
