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=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,7eaf9f2597de2259
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-10-12 01:34:03 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!news1.google.com!newsfeed.stanford.edu!newsfeeds.belnet.be!news.belnet.be!newsfeed00.sul.t-online.de!t-online.de!newsfeed.r-kom.de!news0.de.colt.net!colt.net!dispose.news.demon.net!news.demon.co.uk!demon!pipehawk.demon.co.uk!not-for-mail
From: john.mccabe@emrad.com.nospam (John McCabe)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: on package naming, should the word
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2001 08:33:10 GMT
Organization: Emrad Ltd
Message-ID: <3bc6aa86.2461619@news.demon.co.uk>
References: <mailman.1002721517.7620.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <9q25ec0248o@drn.newsguy.com>
 <slrn9sanqm.cb.randhol+abuse@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>
 <9q421v0bbg@drn.newsguy.com> <mlhx7.24432$ev2.32999@www.newsranger.com>
 <9q4d850163k@drn.newsguy.com> <x7vofnehr0c.fsf@smaug.pushface.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pipehawk.demon.co.uk
X-NNTP-Posting-Host: pipehawk.demon.co.uk:158.152.226.81
X-Trace: news.demon.co.uk 1002875600 nnrp-12:25468 NO-IDENT
 pipehawk.demon.co.uk:158.152.226.81
X-Complaints-To: abuse@demon.net
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.21/32.243
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:14363
Date: 2001-10-12T08:33:10+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

On 11 Oct 2001 21:16:03 +0100, Simon Wright <simon@pushface.org>
wrote:

>Robert*@ <Robert_member@newsguy.com> writes:
>
>> the class construct is the basic construct in OO as commonly
>> used. Ada does not have it. It is that simple. Ada does do OO, but
>> not using the common OO notation.
>> 
>> You can argue for years which is the better notation, but the fact
>> remains that the Java/C++ notation for OO is the common and the
>> popular one and the one most programmer are used to, not the Ada
>> notation.
>
>I have a reference from someone I trust to an extent (Martin Fowler)
>that Smalltalk is highly favoured among the business community. The
>statement was a few years back (97?). So where would _that_ leave
>C++/Java style?

So what does Smalltalk look like? I believe we have a mutual
acquaintance who used Smalltalk at one point, but I can't remember how
class methods were called.