schultz@grebyn.com (Ronald) (01/03/90)
As a project manager for an IBM mainframe user's group (GUIDE International), I am often questioned as to who is using object- oriented languages, DBMSs, and development techniques in their shops. I have made a number of queries as to who is using any of the above for conventional business and MIS applications such as Order Entry, Purchasing, Accounting, or Executive Information Systems. To date, I have received very few responses indicating any activity in these areas. So my question is, who is using OO-(fill in the blank) and to what purpose ? What kinds of applications are being developed, and for what kinds of customers ? Is object-oriented simply a tool for compiler architects, or electrical engineers, or simply a marketing buzzword ? Please send me information about your application and customer, and I'll suumarize and post it later to the net. Please include the following if at all possible: o A brief description of the application o Number of staff devoted to the effort o Size of the project (man-months, LOC, ...) o Language or DBMS used o Development Methodology, and author of methodology Thanks for your help. Ron Schultz schultz@grebyn.com
bagpiper@pnet02.gryphon.com (Michael Hunter) (01/07/90)
schultz@grebyn.com (Ronald) writes: > > o A brief description of the application In house scientific applications and flight programs for satellites. > o Number of staff devoted to the effort 4 > o Size of the project (man-months, LOC, ...) small...approximately 13-15 KLOC of Ada (that is the satellite stuff) the analysis stuff varies and is written in C, C++, and Pascal using varying levels of OOPs type programming. > o Language or DBMS used Ada, Pascal, C, and C++ (actually I am still trying to get people to accept C++ fully...but it is coming.. :)) > o Development Methodology, and author of methodology We use basic OOPs ideas (abstraction, late binding, encapsulation). Up to this point it has been hard to sell anything to radical to some of the older engineers. Some of them still think that "data structures" are evil. I would like to see the results of your survey if possible... Michael Mike Hunter - Box's and CPU's from HELL: iapx80[012]86, PR1ME 50 Series, 1750a UUCP: {ames!elroy, <routing site>}!gryphon!pnet02!bagpiper INET: bagpiper@pnet02.gryphon.com
prager@Data-IO.COM (David Prager) (01/09/90)
In article <24386@gryphon.COM> bagpiper@pnet02.gryphon.com (Michael Hunter) writes: >schultz@grebyn.com (Ronald) writes: >> >We use basic OOPs ideas (abstraction, late binding, encapsulation). Up to >this point it has been hard to sell anything to radical to some of the older >engineers. Some of them still think that "data structures" are evil. Oh, no, its older engineers! Pretty soon, we're going to stop using punchcards for our work. We may not program in anything as radical as C++, but we are looking into OOPS; maybe Fortran++. ------------------------------------------------------------------- David Prager (w)206-881-6444 (h)206-485-4397 Data I/O Corp 10525 Willows Rd. NE prager@DATA-IO.COM Redmond, WA. ...uw-beaver!entropy!dataio!prager 98073-9746 or whatever works.
patrickd@chinet.chi.il.us (Patrick Deupree) (01/22/90)
In article <1364@pilchuck.Data-IO.COM> prager@pilchuck.Data-IO.COM (David Prager) writes: >Oh, no, its older engineers! Pretty soon, we're going to stop using >punchcards for our work. We may not program in anything as radical >as C++, but we are looking into OOPS; maybe Fortran++. > Hey, just as long as it isn't object oriented COBOL. I can't tell you how much it scared me to hear that they were actually planning that one. Heck, that's just as bad as Presentation Manager development with COBOL. -- "I place my faith in fools. Self confidence, my friends call it." -Edgar Allen Poe Patrick Deupree -> patrickd@chinet.chi.il.us
horstman@sjsumcs.sjsu.edu (Cay Horstmann) (01/25/90)
In article <1990Jan21.211023.23538@chinet.chi.il.us> patrickd@chinet.chi.il.us (Patrick Deupree) writes: > >Hey, just as long as it isn't object oriented COBOL. I can't tell you >how much it scared me to hear that they were actually planning that one. >Heck, that's just as bad as Presentation Manager development with COBOL. If it comes out, it will undoubtedly be called "ADD 1 TO COBOL".