From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,97482af7429a6a62 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 10d15b,97482af7429a6a62 X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,97482af7429a6a62 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: rmartin@rcmcon.com (Robert Martin) Subject: Re: C++ not OOP? (Was: Language Efficiency Date: 1995/04/21 Message-ID: <1995Apr21.182555.6995@rcmcon.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 101369036 references: <3mbmd5$s06@icebox.mfltd.co.uk> <3mcfbf$psl@acmez.gatech.edu> <3mgnkc$e3j@atlantis <3muaif$46u@atlantis.utmb.edu> <3n0lsu$nio@druid.borland.com> <3n0uvi$8jt@atlantis.utmb.edu> organization: R. C. M. Consulting Inc. 708-918-1004 newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.cobol Date: 1995-04-21T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Curtis Bass writes: > iv. Since it is a pure OOPL, there is a great > likelihood that the language itself is of > a fairly simple and elegant design. OTOH, > C+$ will probably be a very complex language, > since it supports two different programming > paradigms (structured and OO). Then you think that Objective_C is "very complex" and Eiffel is "very simple". I submit that you are, without saying so, assuming that all hybrids must be as complex as C++, and all non-hybrids must be as simple as Smalltalk. That is quite a big assumption. -- Robert Martin | Design Consulting | Training courses offered: Object Mentor Assoc.| rmartin@rcmcon.com | Object Oriented Analysis 2080 Cranbrook Rd. | Tel: (708) 918-1004 | Object Oriented Design Green Oaks IL 60048 | Fax: (708) 918-1023 | C++