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: f43e6,b87849933931bc93
X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,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
From: ell@access1.digex.net (Ell)
Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ?
Date: 1997/01/01
Message-ID: <5acjtn$5uj@news3.digex.net>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 207041725
organization: The Universe
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: <comp.lang.ada>


Jon S Anthony (jsa@alexandria) wrote:
: ell@access5.digex.net (Ell) writes:
: 
: > Ian Joyner (i.joyner@acm.org) wrote:
: > : Ell wrote:
: > : > 
: > : > Ian Joyner (i.joyner@acm.org) wrote:
: > : > 
: >: > : What made me think of this was that Bill Gates stated in his book that
: >: > : Boeng designed the entire 777 aircraft using one gigantic electronic
: >: > : document! Physical engineering disciplines have made good use of
: >: > : computing technology, it's about time software engineers followed
: >: > : the same path... better and more productive languages and environments,
: >: > : and stop defending archaic 25 year old languages from another era.
  
: > : > I find some 25 year languages like C++ very useful even today.  A lot of
: > : > following a good OO paradigm is in how tools are used and approached.
  
: > : And people can still drive model T Fords, and fly WWI planes. 
 
: > 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.
 
: With respect to this "led/leads" claim: Such as?????  I can't think of
: _any_ where this is true.  Though I can think of at least one
: important _implementation_ aspect where this seems to be true.

Led (first or second) wrt the OO paradigm: Private data members, static
resolution of overloaded functions, protected members, and multiple
inheritance. Correct me if I'm wrong.  Remember this is wrt the early
'80's.

Elliott