<div>Although I don't get to tinker with workflow that much these days, this would be my 2c worth from what I've seen:</div><div><br></div><div>- Only about half of developers actually know any ABAP OO. Even fewer would be able to come up with a good OO design. </div>
<div><br></div><div>- Of these developers, again only a subset know any workflow, so to get a workflow developer who is also competent in ABAP OO is not common. </div><div><br></div><div>- Then there's the question of how many of these people (who have both workflow and OO skills) have actually used ABAP OO with workflow, and I'm yet to meet one. </div>
<div><br></div><div>- Add to that the fact that the BOR's been around for a long time, most developers seem to have come across it some time or another and, at the end of the day, it's not that hard to 'learn' (most of our methods seem to call a function module to do the work and just sandwich it between some swc macros) and that's why you have a very slow uptake of ABAP OO workflows (I haven't seen one yet). </div>
<div><br></div><div>When I suggested it at one site, the Dev manager looked scared and said he'd never heard of it and that he'd rather stick to the known / tried and tested. </div><div><br></div><div>Gavin</div><br>
<div class="gmail_quote">On 22 February 2011 09:22, Madgambler <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:madgambler@hotmail.com">madgambler@hotmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Rick,<br>
<br>
So that post looks like it was written for Netweaver 2004s. If SAP had seen anything worthwhile in delivering that promise I think it has long since evaporated. Around about the same time as they changed tack and poured effort into Java stuff I would have thought.<br>
<br>
Certainly when we upgraded to ECC 6 there was no mention at all of re-pointing our extensive use of Workflow towards ABAP OO. So between your post snippet and the ECC 6 push either the money ran out or the will or both.<br>
<br>
On the brighter side Mike P tells me that we should expect a new SE24-type editor for Workflow Classes at some point soon which would a step in the right direction at least.<br>
<br>
Although, I admit, I still miss the line editor on the old R/2 days now and then and am sometimes a little lost in the new multiple-coloured collapsible section editor<br>
<br>
Sent from my iPhone<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5"><br>
On 21 Feb 2011, at 21:25, "Sample, Rick" <<a href="mailto:Rick.Sample@graybar.com">Rick.Sample@graybar.com</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
> Hi Mikes,<br>
><br>
>> From all I have read, and that's quite a bit. BOR was never intended to be the model for object oriented design. And indeed states that in its own SAP Help files. "The BOR object model will be integrated into ABAP Objects in the next Release by migrating the BOR object types to the ABAP class library." <a href="http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw2004s/helpdata/en/c3/225b5654f411d194a60000e8353423/frameset.htm" target="_blank">http://help.sap.com/saphelp_nw2004s/helpdata/en/c3/225b5654f411d194a60000e8353423/frameset.htm</a><br>
> Sounds fairly straight forward to me. But as of yet, not so integrated.<br>
><br>
> My reading / translation, all standard BORs will be rolled up into ABAP Objects, ported over with something like cl_BUS2032.<br>
><br>
> Hate to sound like the kids in the back seat, asking if we are there yet, but this is exactly the answers (direction) I am seeking. Where we going, when, how long will it take to get there, will there be ports (as stated in the help file), standards for mixing the two, etc.<br>
> I understand, some have confidentiality clauses. (Just tell me. I promise, I won't tell anyone)<br>
><br>
> Any recent official word from SAP on this subject? If we know, we know. If we are still winging it (SAP that is) and checking the wind direction, that's cool too. I understand, it's a BIG ship. But I am sure there are several others that would start if better direction from SAP.<br>
><br>
> As far as BOR goes, anyone who will work in our WF dept, MUST have BOR experience at this point in time. That's not going away any time soon because of all the BOR code that we have developed. And until I am 100% confident that I can bang out something quick in ABAP Objects, if a high priority comes down the pipe line, it will most likely be written in BOR.<br>
><br>
> Rick<br>
><br>
><br>
>> -----Original Message-----<br>
>> From: <a href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</a><br>
>> [mailto:<a href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</a>] On<br>
>> Behalf Of Madgambler<br>
>> Sent: Monday, February 21, 2011 12:48<br>
>> PM<br>
>> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group<br>
>> Cc: SAP Workflow Users' Group<br>
>> Subject: Re: ABAP Objects - Percent of<br>
>> WF'ers using ABAP OO?<br>
>><br>
>> Mike,<br>
>><br>
>> Interestingly that's where we disagree<br>
>> most.<br>
>><br>
>> I don't believe it is in a client's interest to<br>
>> ignore any future adjustments of BOR<br>
>> functionality out of hand and branch out<br>
>> with an ABAP OO 'ported' version based<br>
>> on a snapshot of the current standard<br>
>> object.<br>
>><br>
><br>
<br>
</div></div>_______________________________________________<br>
<div><div></div><div class="h5">SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>