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: 103376,97482af7429a6a62
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-Thread: 109fba,97482af7429a6a62
X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public
X-Google-Thread: 10d15b,97482af7429a6a62
X-Google-Attributes: gid10d15b,public
From: dewar@cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar)
Subject: Re: C++ not OOP? (Was: Language Efficiency
Date: 1995/04/21
Message-ID: <dewar.798477736@gnat>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 101369156
references: <dewar.797512974@gnat> <3n3o9c$cud@atlantis.utmb.edu>
 <3n43p0$ehs@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> <3n5oup$g2s@atlantis.utmb.edu>
 <3n5r92$95@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> <dewar.798394059@gnat>
 <3n89vl$kmr@atlantis.utmb.edu>
organization: Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences
newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.cobol
Date: 1995-04-21T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

OK Curtis, then since we are just talking terminology, with no other kind
of motives, let's choose an unloaded word (you could after all choose a
loaded word on the other side, like restrictive). how about something
like "centered", which seems pretty neutral. 

But somehow, I don't think people would put nearly as much energy into the
debate on either side if we were just asking whether C++ was object-centered
...