Simon Verona wrote:
I took a long look at Cache myself, and to start with I was very
impressed, but then I started looking a little deeper and I got turned
off by what I saw.

My problem? The ObjectScript (MUMPS or M) language. While you don't have
to use it for development, everything ends up getting turned into
ObjectScript when it's built, and ObjectScript really, /really/ sucks.
It's even worse than C, and soesn't have the advantage of C's pervasiveness.

Moreover, the Intersystems guys make much of their support for multiple
inheritance, but from what I saw, they don't have /real/ MI. Instead,
they generate a bunch of additional code into the classes that "inherit"
the behaviour of other classes. So calls to inherited methods don't call
the superclass, they just have copies of that code built into them.
Which is bullshit.

Anyway, that's my take on Cache. I could be mistaken on some aspects,
but I saw enough to turn me off.

Cheers,
Luke

Interesting....

To be honest, I've not found that I like any of the built in tools/products
for client-server programming provided by any of the MV vendors... With
jBase I use jRCS which is a third party product which is marketed by jBase
Int.

I would guess that if Cache is any good, then a third party product will be
ported across! My client software is fortunatley configured to use only the
basic stuff such as read/write and call databasic subroutine. I have my
own object for providing a managed dynamic array on the client.. So, I
don't have too many demands on the software provided for connectivity - all
I ask is that it is fast, lightweight and has a low end-user per seat cost!

I've put aside looking at this in any depth for the next 12-18 months at the
minimum - so maybe cache will have "matured" with Jim's assistance in that
time... Then again, jBase may still be be viable and I can continue to
sleep soundly...


Regards
Simon


"Luke Webber" <luke (AT) webber (DOT) com.au> wrote

On Mon, 04 Jul 2005 12:53:11 +1000, Luke Webber <luke (AT) webber (DOT) com.au>
wrote:

I'd disagree, but then I've been using M/ Cache ObjectScript for over
20 years. I've learnt enough languages to know that a language is a
language is a language. They all do the same thing at the end of the
day. It's down to learning and using the language that's available,
they all have their strengths and weaknesses. There's never been
anything I've not been able to do in Cache ObjectScript, it's fast to
develop in and lightning fast at executing. It's succinct and highly
portable, and having been working in Java recently, I know which I'd
prefer to develop in :-)

So, don't be put off, take a good look, and check out some of the
amazing stuff people do with it before condemning it too hastily !

All the above strictly IMHO of course !


---
Rob Tweed
M/Gateway Developments Ltd

Global DOMination with eXtc : http://www.mgateway.tzo.com
---