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=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 10461e,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid10461e,public From: Paul_Gover@uk.ibm.com Subject: Re: Interesting but sensitive topic to discuss (HELP: - OOP and CASE tools) Date: 1996/11/07 Message-ID: <55sfjs$15v6@grimsel.zurich.ibm.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 195086115 references: <32813322.41C6@kyebek3.kjist.ac.kr> <55pqr5$136a@grimsel.zurich.ibm.com> organization: IBM Warwick Development Group reply-to: Paul_Gover@uk.ibm.com newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.ai Date: 1996-11-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In , Jan Steinman writes: >In article <55pqr5$136a@grimsel.zurich.ibm.com>, Paul_Gover@uk.ibm.com wrote: >> ... >> OK, here's my 2 cents: most OO development methods concentrate too much >> on objects and too little on classes... > >Gee, in my 8 month experience with one well-known methodology, I felt just >the opposite! > ... Jan, I did say "most", not "all"! So, which well-known methodology was it? I'd like to know more; either I don't know it, or I've misunderstood it. Paul Gover IBM Warwick Development Group Mumbling for myself, not IBM