Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!occrsh!uokmax!apple!usc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!caen!etsu!cmi.com!kevin From: kevin@cmi.com (Kevin Hegg) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: Oracle for the Mac (really 4D) Message-ID: <4359@etsu.CMI.COM> Date: 11 Sep 90 12:27:09 GMT Sender: news@etsu.CMI.COM Organization: EDS Corp - Center for Machine Intelligence Lines: 54 References:<49079@seismo.CSS.GOV> <28@genco.uucp> <4331@etsu.CMI.COM> <30@genco.uucp> >From: rad@genco.uucp (Bob Daniel) > >Being forced to program with SQL as a programming (Oracle) language has >alot to be desired, even in Forms 3.0. SQL is a query language not a >procedure Believe me, I am not saying that SQL is the best solution for all applications. I have developed applications with Oracle, Ingres, Sybase, and SQL/DS and they are adequate for certain types of data manipulation, but not all. >I'd rather deal with sets and subsets of records in a procedure >lanuage than hassle with SQL selections....At least 4D is a >procedure language. Yes, 4D is a procedural language, but it is far less powerful than other procedural languages (C, Pascal, etc). Also, almost every RDBMS is accompanied with a procedural language, so 4D does not have an advantage there. >Version 2.1 has solved many of those problems but I never found it to be >a serious problem. But they haven't solved all of them. At a certain point (and numerous bug fix releases) you get a little tired of waiting for something that you have already paid for. Also, if ACIUS were a little more forthcoming with the problems and some work arounds then it would be a little more acceptable. >Do what? I can have dozens of objects and it doesn't fall flat on its >face. Have your worked much with 4D? Have you tried the compiler? When it takes a few seconds to repaint the screen (with dozens of objects) for an interactive application, then that is unacceptable. With the same amount of programming effort in C I can get the same look with almost instantaneous screen repainting. The compiler was not even an option until just recently. I am still trying to decide whether it is worth the investment. >You might reconsider 4D for serious projects because there are several >done in 4D that Oracle simply couldn't touch. I know, I've worked in both >and know developers who have worked in both since the two have existed. We have not totally abandoned 4D, but it is rapidly falling out of grace. We try to objectively look at each project and determine what the successes and failures were and whether we received an adequate return on our investment. With 4D we feel that we have not received a return on our investment. I don't doubt that people are and will continue developing with 4D, but our experience tells us that it is a poor development tool for non-trivial applications. I know most people want to believe that their application is non-trivial, but in many cases this just isn't so. 4D will probably satisfy those with trivial data manipulation tasks. Kevin Hegg, EDS Corp - Center for Machine Intelligence 2001 Commonwealth Blvd., Ann Arbor, Michigan 48105 Phone: (313) 995-0900 Internet: kevin@cmi.com Applelink: D5990