Re: NewEra: Anyone using it?

Mike Segel wrote: } } David W Chan wrote: } > } > Mike Segel <mikey@segel.NOSPAM-.KING.OF.MYDOMAIN.-NOSPAM.com> wrote: } > } > >David W Chan wrote: } > > } > >> >- Overall experience } > >> } > >> Good language and the tools are improving. Lack of object } > >> partitioning means that partitioning is difficult. Lack of exception } > >> handling makes it hard to handle errors in a controlled way. } > >> } > >Gaff! } > >Good Language? } > >Not! } > >As far as C++ derived languages, Java has it beat hands down. } > } > I wouldn't go that far. The NewEra language is good. Java is better } > but it is not way ahead. } > } Yeah, it is. If you want to get down to the syntax of the } grammer, java is much cleaner. } } > Apart from the exception handling mentioned above, the only major } > difference is the support for interfaces. Java could do with some of } > the features found in NE such as handlers, parameter naming, automatic } > casting, and being able to return multiple parameters. } > } No, } See, that is the problem. The "handler" of Informix is full of } holes and poorly implemented. See the entire thread on ix_supertable } exception handling. Yep, this is very true. Due to the poor exception handling the ixSupertable class offers, you have to derive a new class and overwrite particular functions ! Eg: if you press <delete> 1st time, you get a nice error message called by the handler, but when quering a new row, and re pressing <delete>, no error appears !!! Actually, no command will work on the supertable ! } } The problem, which can not be fixed, is that all objects are tied } to their window. I mean that all objects are down the line from } the window in which they were instantiated. } } The concept of delagation is foreign and can't work within NE framework. } This is a limiting factor and causes exception errors. } I don't believe that there is the concept of an application object, } separate from a window? Is there? } } Another problem is that to modify an existing object, you have } to subclass that object. So for every visual object you create, } you are subclassing that object, not just an instantiation of } that object. } } > >For OO, look at smalltalk and Objective C. } > } > Is NewEra not OO? } > } Technically no. Informix has fudged the definition of OO to suit } their needs. I don't believe N.E. is polymorphic, supports multiple } inheritence, does it? } } Another thing to point out, is that some of the class hierarchy is } sloppy. For example, (If this still exists in 3.0), you have a button, } then a picture button. Why the two distinct object classes? } IMHO, it should be one class. Unless a graphic is specified, then } use the default square boundries and image. The functionality is the } same. Still exists in NE3 Also, NE claims to support OCX's... Did anyone manage to pass an Integer to an OCX that ACCEPTS an Integer value (NOT an ixValue) ? Btw, any one used the crystal reports class ? } } > >Just $.02 worth. } > } > >-Mikey } > } > David } > } -Mike David