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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: ell@access1.digex.net (Ell) Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1997/01/01 Message-ID: <5achsn$5uj@news3.digex.net>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 207038510 organization: The Universe followup-to: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1997-01-01T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: clovis@wartech.com wrote: : In <5aa73v$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. I think the proper essence of OO is about programming the collaboration of classes/objects. Far different from being focused on algorithms. Elliott