Structual programming the bane of my existance. I thought the debate was put to rest here years ago. Now it is raising it’s head again. Why? WHy? WHY? That is the question of the day.
I was very frustrated. I thought the decision had been made a long time ago. So I asked for Mentor help. Quickly found out I should have posted this publically. So this is my summary artical.
Structual – Yes I really listen to the other side.
So for the Structural side of the debate.
- It’s faster to write. Our team knows it. There is no learning curve. We have many, many projects with tight deadlines. So when are “we” going to be able to learn a new technology.
- It is a completely different way of thinking and will take time we don’t have.
- The performance of structural programming is better for large reports.
- We have function modules for reusabilty.
- Inherentence makes our head hurt.
- Polymorphism – Wow that sounds like a neat word we’ll never use.
- We do use ALV OO – it’s quick and easy to use
My TURN Non-structual side ABAP OO:
I have a series of blogs that I will be sharing with you. Learning new technology and some slide from my network session.
One of the things I would like to do is provide a demo, and voice over for some of these slides. They can get confusing just reading them. I’ll try and get it out soon. There is just so many hours in a day.
I do know there is a limit on Objects:
RFCs, ABAP Dynpros, and Certain Frameworks
A big Thank you to the Mentor Team that helped me with the reasons. John Moy who really helped. At times I steal phrases from him. Education Delivery Organization. She took the time out for my request.
Another thank you to Jim Spath who strongly suggested a blog Good thing I already had one started. Thank you to Cynthia Kramer a Senior Education Consultant in the North America SAP. She is another one I stole phrases from.