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: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public From: clovis@wartech.com Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/31 Message-ID: <5aae85$ad8@masters0.InterNex.Net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 206919141 references: <5aa73v$p14@news3.digex.net> organization: InterNex Information Services 1-800-595-3333 reply-to: clovis@wartech.com newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1996-12-31T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In <5aa73v$p14@news3.digex.net>, ell@access5.digex.net (Ell) writes: >I find the key aspects of C++ to be within the parameters of the >_progressive_ OO paradigm and practice. In many ways C++ has led and >still leads in the expression and implementation of many significantly >useful OO concepts. I concur with this, but think it does not go far enough. ANY language, up to and including direct object code, is just fine. The real problem is personal discipline -- designing completely before coding. Wirth's paradigm is STILL at the basis of all good design and coding practice. Data Structures + Algorithms = Programs. This whole thread somehow ignors that basic reality. The most aggressive paradigm still respects Wirth's basic rule. One MUST have structured data (otherwise exact access is impossible, and all algorithms produce garbage). One MUST have algorithms -- otherwise, the data is nothing more than an electronic, fixed book which one can't even access reliably. Any language which provides both these features is sufficient. All we're really discussing is HOW to provide data structures and algorithms. There isn't a real paradigm shift until the basic model itself changes. All we're really talking about is how to represent the data structures and algorithms, that is, how to go about implementing them.