Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

This is a place to put any ideas!  Anything.  We can brainstorm how to use them.  Perhaps in a blog.  Perhaps in code exchange.   Someone else could write the blog, and we can add it to this page or a different one.  This is the great thing about here!   We write anything down and see what everyone else has to say.

My next blog is scheduled for next week.  I'll e-mail it as well as post it here.   The basic idea is to look at two different ways of programming a function module.  The first will use the function module with memory ids the second will use a class with an internal table attribute to contain the internal table without the memory ideas.  I'll try to give an example shortly.  That will let you think about what I did, if I did it wrong, and how to improve upon it.    Any other ideas are welcome, and I'll try to comment.  This way we can start some blogs with some ideas behind them.  After we have a good start, we could add something to code exchange or e-learning.

So for the structural guys - this is the function module.

code...

Move to OOP - this is the class / method.

code...

  • No labels

2 Comments

  1. The idea is as simple as:

    1. Michelle's blog  has originated the idea as below.

    2.  Form a virtual team to be part of a new project dealing with moving Structural programming to ABAP Objects.
    3. The same functionality will be achieved through structural coding and via ABAP objects.

    4.  The team (we) needs to analyze as to why doing it with ABAP objects is better in the current scenario. We may be aware that not all situations are apt for Objects or even allow doing it the Object way. e.g. if a tcode allows only creation of subroutines , why will be add objects there.

    5.  Advantages gained. e.g. Performance, maintainability, extensibility etc. The extra effort required in doing it the object way. There are many situations wherein I think what value will OOP add to this small object. I am expecting such confusions to be cleared via this.

    6.  The team needs a good combination of people - few who have been working on objects since quite a while and can guide , members new to objects , theme of the project (what will we develop :) ) , monitoring the progress.

    7. The project will move at a slow and steady pace as all of us have our regular work too . :) So no rush is intended.

    Currently we are a team of three and certainly need more and versatile team members.

    1. Michelle Crapo (needs no introduction)

    2. Kumud  Singh (Has been working on OOP concept).

    3. Nabheet (New to Objects - as far as I know. Please correct if I am wrong)

    If any one of you think of a better/changed plan add up here.

    Thanks,

    Kumud


     

  2. Thanks Kumud for adding me...Yeah i am new to objects ...

    Its a good start to a good year..

    Lets Rock and Roll:)

    Thanks

    Nabheet