Re: LTG's "Gooey" Language - Anyone Used It?

Dear Dave, We have just had a chance to look at this tool. We had a person over from LTG at our company and converted our applications for us. We gave our most complex applications and all compiled without any problems. The product works in Client-Server environment with a Presentation Layer running on the client. We had a requirement to run some applications on our PC with a report file which would be generated on the server. For this they have a 'rcp' and a 'rcmd' utility which can be invoked from the 4gl appl. The 'rcp' part worked fine but we got a problem with the syntax of the 'rcmd' command and hence could not see this feature. We also were able to specify color attributes to the fields on the form with different colors for active and inactive rows. We could also go directly to a particular char position in the field to modify the data. All input arrays and display arrays automatically had scroll bars on it. We saw the same p-code file running on Motif, Win 95 and Win NT. The appearence of our screens changed completely with buttons for all On-key keys in our code. The performance was excellent which should be as all the code is running on the Unix server. Also only one copy of the code is loaded in the memory and shared among all the users. This happens even with p-code compilation. We had a table with million rows and fired a query to select all the rows. We immediately got the response with 10 rows which was part of our display array; and then on page down we got the remaining and so on. We found out that all the million rows are not fetched to the PC. Only when the rows are required then only they are pulled over the server. This means less network traffic. We had some menu programs written in ESQL/C for Windows and MS VC++ currently running on client PCs. From this menu we accept the user login id and password and then draw some buttons with bitmaps for all the modules that the user can access. This can not be used now as all code needs to be on the Unix server. The soln is to write a similar prog in 4gl but the user interface will not be the same. The person from 4Js promised to write something similar and show it to us. The bottom line is if it works in I-4gl then it works with 4J's compiler with much more features. The 4gl code can be further enhanced by including statements which only 4J's compiler can understand and I-4gl will ignore as comments. We are surely seriously looking at this tool as we can not afford to wait to redesign our user interface code in NE and use the logic from 4gl. Also an OO tool means that all our programmers need to be retrained. We do not have a requirement to use OO methodology. We also have a mix of dumb terminals and PCs. This tool is too good to believe until you see it working. We spend a full day with the person from 4J's and tested various features of the product. If you like any more information please send me a mail. Dilip At 01:47 10/12/96 GMT, you wrote: >Hi! > >My company is currently evaluating a 4GL substitute language from LTG, >Inc. (Lead to Gold). The product is call "Gooey". It is supposed to >automatically run a 4GL program under Windows (3/95/NT), X-Windows or >character based Unix. > >I'm curious if anyone has used this product. If so, what are you're >feelings about it? If you evaluated it and decided not to use it, >why? > >I am most anxious to hear from anyone regarding this subject. My >company certainly doesn't want to commit to a product if it doesn't >live up to its billing! > >Thank You! > >Dave > > >