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=-0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,FREEMAIL_FROM, INVALID_MSGID,SUBJ_ALL_CAPS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fef06,3aad2600dfe8f337 X-Google-Attributes: gidfef06,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,3aad2600dfe8f337 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 111d6b,3aad2600dfe8f337 X-Google-Attributes: gid111d6b,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,3aad2600dfe8f337 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1014db,3aad2600dfe8f337 X-Google-Attributes: gid1014db,public X-Google-Thread: f753e,3aad2600dfe8f337 X-Google-Attributes: gidf753e,public X-Google-Thread: 10b276,3aad2600dfe8f337 X-Google-Attributes: gid10b276,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,3aad2600dfe8f337 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: Brad Clawsie Subject: Re: WHERE ARE ALL THE OT EXPERTS??? Date: 1996/07/27 Message-ID: <31FA8B24.41C67EA6@yahoo.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 170547076 references: <4t6hk2$cek@chinx10.thoughtport.net> <31F6FC7E.7179@interaccess.com> <31F70013.7F13@online.no> <31FA5DBB.6C38@interaccess.com> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Internet Systems, Inc. mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.object,comp.object.corba,comp.object.logic,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++.leda,comp.lang.java.misc,comp.lang.javascript,comp.lang.objective-c,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.programming,comp.lang.java x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0b5 (X11; I; FreeBSD 2.1.0-RELEASE i386) Date: 1996-07-27T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >>Second, I believe only managers are interested >>in "Class-Responsibility-Collaborator" cards -- fancy acronym, >>which they can impress other (low-level) managers with, but (1) >>it's so trivial as to be completely useless, and (2) it's *worse* >>than useless because it's a completely action-centered approach. >>Urgh. > >So? That means it is not a legitamte question on a OO quiz? >There are many aspects to OO that I don't agree with. That does not >mean they are not legitamate consepts ( as concepts). Perhaps what the top poster was trying to convey is the notion that OO technology is completely overstudied. Go to any technical bookstore; the shelves are stuffed with mostly worthless OO material. Consultants (it would be irRATIONAL to name names) make a living coining new terms, complicating simple concepts, and generally over-extending the mileage they can get out of the OO brainshare. Brad -- Brad Clawsie brad@yahoo.com