PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Rajeev Bat » Fri, 04 Nov 1994 09:25:02



Excuse me, but Powerbuilder is NOT OBJECT-ORIENTED .....
it IS OBJECT-BASED.

Later,

RB

: : Does anyone have any experience with the tools?  Which one is best?

: I'm not sure any one of them is "best", they each have strengths and
: weaknesses.  From what I hear ObjectView is object-based, not
: object-oriented, so if you're looking for object-oriented you'd be best
: off to stick with PowerBuilder or SQLWindows.  Of course you're going to
: get answers from both camps saying their favourite tool is better and
: slamming the other tool for everything from syntax to support to the
: parentage of the company founder.  I've got my own bias, but it really
: doesn't matter what it is.

: Get both (or all three) tools into your shop and build a prototype in
: each of them.  See which is easier to learn and suits your environment
: and style of working the best, then decide.
: --


: H: (403) 271-7387     | Fidonet:      1:134/40
: W: (403) 296-0663     |

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Gunther Birznie » Fri, 04 Nov 1994 23:34:36



>Excuse me, but Powerbuilder is NOT OBJECT-ORIENTED .....
>it IS OBJECT-BASED.
>Later,
>RB

Its difficult to excuse a statement which is not really true.

Rajeev, for all intents and purposes PowerBuilder IS OBJECT ORIENTED.
It supports encapsulation, inheritence, non-visual as well as visual
objects.  I think the only things it does not really support (to my
knowledge) are overloaded operators/functions and multiple inheritence.

IMHO, this is not enough to make someone stand up and say it is definately
not Object-Oriented.  Object-Based means that there are objects that
come with the program but you can not extend them or make your own.

Visual Basic is ObjectBased because VBXes are the objects with properties
and methods but you can not extend them to make your own VBXes or the like.

PowerBuilder is ObjectOriented because for all intents and purposes that
99% of programmers are likely to use ObjectOriented programming for,
PB supports.

There are, of course, arguements about why such and such features of OO
programming is needed over another.  But the bottom line of OO programming
for what real programmers want to use it for (Inheritence and reuse of
past code), PowerBuilder has it. SQLWindows also has an OO programming
language.

Now, SqlWindows and PowerBuilder aren't "SmallTalk" or "C++"
but that does not mean they is simply "OBJECT BASED" and not "OBJECT ORIENTED".

Later,
  Gunther

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Bryan-Kirk Reinhar » Sun, 06 Nov 1994 14:43:51



(Gunther Birznieks) writes:


>>Excuse me, but Powerbuilder is NOT OBJECT-ORIENTED .....
>>it IS OBJECT-BASED.

>>Later,

>>RB

>Its difficult to excuse a statement which is not really true.

>Rajeev, for all intents and purposes PowerBuilder IS OBJECT ORIENTED.
>It supports encapsulation, inheritence, non-visual as well as visual
>objects.  I think the only things it does not really support (to my
>knowledge) are overloaded operators/functions and multiple inheritence.

>IMHO, this is not enough to make someone stand up and say it is
definately
>not Object-Oriented.  Object-Based means that there are objects that
>come with the program but you can not extend them or make your own.

>Visual Basic is ObjectBased because VBXes are the objects with
properties
>and methods but you can not extend them to make your own VBXes or the
like.

>PowerBuilder is ObjectOriented because for all intents and purposes
that
>99% of programmers are likely to use ObjectOriented programming for,
>PB supports.

>There are, of course, arguements about why such and such features of OO
>programming is needed over another.  But the bottom line of OO
programming
>for what real programmers want to use it for (Inheritence and reuse of
>past code), PowerBuilder has it. SQLWindows also has an OO programming
>language.

>Now, SqlWindows and PowerBuilder aren't "SmallTalk" or "C++"
>but that does not mean they is simply "OBJECT BASED" and not "OBJECT
ORIENTED".

>Later,
>  Gunther

I disagree w/ your rebuttal.  Powerbuilder and SQLWindows are NOT object
oriented.  They certainly have some Object Oriented features, but that
doesn't make them true oopl.  It's a marketing ploy.  Try dynamic
allocation of memory in real time, such as creating datafields on a form
on the fly?  if you can do it.  You'll eventually hit a wall.  And they
are doggy.  Too much overhead 4gls.  Try creating a class of datafields
that are SQL enabled?  You'll blow out memory with instance variables
and dog with message processing when you need to use alot of them, not
to mention generic inefficient dynamic SQL code. It's a shame the
vendors are trying so hard to export false reality.  It leads to some
real stupid programming practices w/ the tools.  The languages weren't
designed for the kind of programming they are selling. So, why try to
use them as such.  Use them for what they are -- business application
front ends.  KISS KISS

I love C++ more than my mother, but I know it's easier to train someone
in a 4gl and get results. I also have no problem with recognizing that
we are writing the last generation of legacy code with these tools
(there are no industry standards for 4gls), so why not use it for what
it's worth rather than have hangups about these theorys of marketing...

As for SQLWindows:

Data encapsulation?  Hardly -- PUBLIC only
Polymorphizmsmsm?  nope...

btw, C++ is not fully object oriented either...it's a hybrid.

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Craig Wagn » Sun, 06 Nov 1994 23:54:10


: Excuse me, but Powerbuilder is NOT OBJECT-ORIENTED .....
: it IS OBJECT-BASED.

It allows me to create objects which can be inherited, I can create
polymorphic functions and code and data are encapsulated in a single
object.  Perhaps if you're a propellerhead and are talking about 'pure'
OO then you have a case, but I wonder if 'pure' OO is so good why hasn't
Smalltalk, which has been around much longer, taken over.  Perhaps 'pure'
OO is no more implementable than a 'pure' 3NF design?

Either that, or you just have a vested interest in either Gupta or
Knowledgeware.
--


H: (403) 271-7387       | Fidonet:      1:134/40
W: (403) 296-0663       |

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Terry Lon » Thu, 10 Nov 1994 23:34:01


: While I'm certainly no PowerBuilder proponent, I've got to say that I fail
: to see where operator overloading has *anything* to do with OO at all... let
: alone 'pure OO'.  It's nothing more than syntactic sugar, and has no
: conneciton to OO whatever.

Polymorphism.

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Mike Steinl » Thu, 10 Nov 1994 04:30:50




>: Excuse me, but Powerbuilder is NOT OBJECT-ORIENTED .....
>: it IS OBJECT-BASED.

>It allows me to create objects which can be inherited, I can create
>polymorphic functions and code and data are encapsulated in a single
>object.  Perhaps if you're a propellerhead and are talking about 'pure'

Ouch!! and Ouch again. First a snit about 'real programmers' and now
propellerheads.  You DO sit high and mighty don't you.

Without overloading operators its not 'pure OO' so it may well be
somewhere between Object-Based and Object-Oriented but OO it's not.

Later,
M

--
Michael Steinley                       ____/|


                                          U

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Andrew Franc » Sat, 12 Nov 1994 03:03:23



Terry Longo writes

KP> While I'm certainly no PowerBuilder proponent, I've got to say that I fail
KP> to see where operator overloading has *anything* to do with OO at all...let
KP> alone 'pure OO'.  It's nothing more than syntactic sugar, and has no
KP> conneciton to OO whatever.

TL> Polymorphism.

KP>Surely you're not saying that a particular language element that happens to  
KP>provide a convenient way of implementing polymorphism is *requirement* for
KP>any language to be considered "purely OO"... or are you?  Certainly
KP>polymorphism can be implemented w/o operator overloading - unless you're
KP>dealing with a language that isn't sufficiently dynamic.

  I agree. I do not believe that function and operator overloading necessarily
make for polymorphism.  Polymorphism is used to implement IS-A relationships
through an inheritance mechanism that allows a sub-type to get the public
features of a parent but override the behavior of particular methods.

--Andrew

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Terry Lon » Sat, 12 Nov 1994 00:33:05


: Terry Longo writes

: > : While I'm certainly no PowerBuilder proponent, I've got to say that I fail
: > : to see where operator overloading has *anything* to do with OO at all...  
: let
: > : alone 'pure OO'.  It's nothing more than syntactic sugar, and has no
: > : conneciton to OO whatever.
: >
: > Polymorphism.

: Surely you're not saying that a particular language element that happens to  
: provide a convenient way of implementing polymorphism is *requirement* for any  
: language to be considered "purely OO"... or are you?  Certainly polymorphism  
: can be implemented w/o operator overloading - unless you're dealing with a  
: language that isn't sufficiently dynamic.

Nope.  I was just saying that (i) polymorphism is a fundamental dynamic of
OO and (ii) operator overloading (in C++) is a mechanism through which
polymorphism is implemented.  Polymorphism is a *requirement*;  operator
overloading is not a *requirement*.  But in C++, operator overloading is
more than syntactic sugar ... it is a mechanism for adding a level of
intuitiveness to the way in which a class can be used.  Consider for example
a class Rational (not a predefined type) that should be designed such
that two instances can be 'added'.  Firstly, any user of class Rational
would expect to be able to add two instances of Rational, and secondly
any such user has experience with the '+' operator.  Thus it makes sense
to define '+' for Rational operands.  The class user does not need to
guess at or search for the member function to add two Rationals.

Sure, operator overloading is not deep, and it is certainly a double-edged
sword.

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Ken Pelleti » Fri, 11 Nov 1994 07:39:22


Terry Longo writes


> : While I'm certainly no PowerBuilder proponent, I've got to say that I fail
> : to see where operator overloading has *anything* to do with OO at all...  
let
> : alone 'pure OO'.  It's nothing more than syntactic sugar, and has no
> : conneciton to OO whatever.

> Polymorphism.

Surely you're not saying that a particular language element that happens to  
provide a convenient way of implementing polymorphism is *requirement* for any  
language to be considered "purely OO"... or are you?  Certainly polymorphism  
can be implemented w/o operator overloading - unless you're dealing with a  
language that isn't sufficiently dynamic.
 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Ken Pelleti » Thu, 10 Nov 1994 08:17:04


Mike Steinley writes



> >: Excuse me, but Powerbuilder is NOT OBJECT-ORIENTED .....
> >: it IS OBJECT-BASED.

> >It allows me to create objects which can be inherited, I can create
> >polymorphic functions and code and data are encapsulated in a single
> >object.  Perhaps if you're a propellerhead and are talking about 'pure'

> Ouch!! and Ouch again. First a snit about 'real programmers' and now
> propellerheads.  You DO sit high and mighty don't you.

> Without overloading operators its not 'pure OO' so it may well be
> somewhere between Object-Based and Object-Oriented but OO it's not.

While I'm certainly no PowerBuilder proponent, I've got to say that I fail to  
see where operator overloading has *anything* to do with OO at all... let alone  
'pure OO'.  It's nothing more than syntactic sugar, and has no connection to OO  
whatever.

Ken Pelletier
--


NiKA Software                     |
1207 W. Newport Ave.              |

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Chuck Hamilt » Wed, 16 Nov 1994 12:12:54


I'm looking for input from anyone who as worked with both PowerBuilder
and SQLWindows for c/s development. Which did you prefer and why.

After reading the reviews in OST, and PC Mag, I really expected SQLW to
blow PBs doors in, but I'm not so sure I agree. From the small amount of
work I've done in both, I'd say the SQLW's QuickOjects make application
development faster than PB, but at what cost? The performance of SQLW
applications that use QO's is pititful.  PB may take a little longer to
develop in, but the resulting application seems to run circles around
SQLW.

What do you think?

BTW I've done nothing pertaining to multi-programmer development and
version control with either. Is there a significant difference between
the two?

 
 
 

PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

Post by Darcy Schul » Wed, 16 Nov 1994 00:35:56



Quote:>>>Excuse me, but Powerbuilder is NOT OBJECT-ORIENTED .....
>>>it IS OBJECT-BASED.
>>Rajeev, for all intents and purposes PowerBuilder IS OBJECT ORIENTED.
>>It supports encapsulation, inheritence, non-visual as well as visual
>>objects.  I think the only things it does not really support (to my
>>knowledge) are overloaded operators/functions and multiple inheritence.
>I disagree w/ your rebuttal.  Powerbuilder and SQLWindows are NOT object
>oriented.  They certainly have some Object Oriented features, but that
>doesn't make them true oopl.  It's a marketing ploy.  Try dynamic
>I love C++ more than my mother, but I know it's easier to train someone
>in a 4gl and get results. I also have no problem with recognizing that
>btw, C++ is not fully object oriented either...it's a hybrid.

OK, most of your argument revolves around the performance of the tool when
performing OO tasks.  Admittedly PowerBuilder isn't a rocket, but does it  
follow that the tool is not OO because of it?  No, I don't think so.
What anyone whose used the product can safely say is that PowerBuilder is
a hybrid tool.  It doesn't strictly enforce OO techniques (like C++) but does
support the concepts of OO development.  Because of performance restrictions
you must adapt the design of the application to make the most efficient use
of your resources and make the most of PowerBuilder's internal classes (which
do not suffer from a performance penalty).  I don't think it's too much of
a marketing game.  They do say "practical approach to Object Orientation",
which you can read however you want.  But to say that the tool is not OO,
when it is obviously capable of the fundamental features of OO, is simply
incorrect.
--
Darcy Schultz
Calgary, AB, CANADA

 
 
 

1. PowerBuilder vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView

|> Does anyone have any experience with the tools?  Which one is best?

I don't know anything about ObjectView, but as for the other two, I've
used both and they both have their strengths and weaknesses.
Based on my experiences, Powerbuilder is a great environment for
quick development of small applications and prototypes.  We have had
many technical problems and limitations with it in our large projects.
Most of these problems come up when you are well into the project
so a quick review of the product doesn't usually uncover any of them.
Sqlwindows, on the other hand, is more robust and delivers industry
strength applications, but it tends to initially take a little longer
to develop applications with it.  This is mainly because of it's true
object oriented structure which requires the initial design, analysis
and development of your base classes.  I actually use Sqlwindows to
prototype some of our C++ class sets before implementing them in C++.
Technically, Sqlwindows also supports data types such as void *, HANDLE,
WORD, DWORD and it even understands HEX which make it mesh better with
the windows environment.

So .. that's our take on it: for small, quick applications use Powerbuilder,
but for more robust, long term solutions look to Sqlwindows.

Good Luck,
--
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+

|  Software Engineer              Phone: (604) 293 5467           | +
|                                                                 | |
|  MPR Teltech Ltd.  -   Burnaby  -  British Columbia  -  Canada  | |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+ |
 \        \               \                 \          \           \|
  +-----------------------------------------------------------------+

2. A3000 keyboard and mouse ports question

3. PowerBuilder vs VisualBasic vs Oracle's CDE vs C++ vs SQLWindows vs ?

4. Connecting to a remote Oracle database from Visual Basic

5. PB vs SQLWindows vs ObjectView (PC User Mag - UK)

6. NE-12K adapter

7. ObjectView Desktop vs. Powerbuilder

8. DVD Region code, registry fix for win2k?

9. Powerbuilder vs. ObjectView

10. VB 3.0 vs PB vs Access 2.0 vs Oracle CDE vs SQL Windows vs C++

11. PowerBuilder vs. ObjectView

12. VB vs. Java vs. Delphi vs. PowerBuilder ...

13. ObjectView Desktop vs PowerBuilder?