Date:         Sun, 16 Nov 1997 19:29:36 GMT
Reply-To:     REXX Programming discussion list <REXXLIST@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
Sender:       REXX Programming discussion list <REXXLIST@UGA.CC.UGA.EDU>
From:         Patrick TJ McPhee <ptjm@INTERLOG.COM>
Organization: Crampton Vinegar Works
Subject:      Re: regular expression matching

In article <64kigq$rlp@dfw-ixnews8.ix.netcom.com>,
 <cybernet@cybernet.pair.com> wrote:
 
%  My bone to pick with NetRexx is slightly different.  It reduces
% the ugly JAVA OO command syntax to essentially classic Rexx syntax.
% A NetREXX programmer doesn't learn the underlying OO concepts.
% A OO programmer wouldn't recognize it as an OO language.
 
Can you give an example of what you mean? NetRexx reduces the amount of
framework you have to put around simple programs, but it allows essentially
the same framework as Java for more complicated classes.
 
 
% Not all code can be buried in a class with properties and methods.
% There is always the code in the main or applet which ties everything
% together.
 
But the main or applet is just a class with properties and methods. Please
elucidate.
--
 
Patrick TJ McPhee
East York  Canada
ptjm@interlog.com