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: f5d71,7248e7bb77d059e8 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: harry@matilda.alt.net.au (Harry Protoolis) Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/06 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 202668526 references: <32A4659D.347A@shef.ac.uk> <32A5A86A.1AF1@shef.ac.uk> organization: alt.computer pty ltd reply-to: harry@alt.net.au newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.java,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1996-12-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Wed, 04 Dec 1996 16:35:54 +0000, Ahmed wrote: >Harry Protoolis wrote: >> >> On Tue, 03 Dec 1996 17:38:37 +0000, Ahmed wrote: >> However, the real question should be 'has OO made a significant positive >> difference', and in my experience the answer is a resounding 'yes!'. >> > > >Dear Harry, >I agree with you that OO has many advantages, but I can not feel that significant improvement >as you said, > >The important question is how measure the success of OO, >Can you please tell me on what crieteria you mesured this significant difference >is it >( code reusibility / software development time / software performace / software reliablity/ >software cost / software portablity / ...etc .. ) these issues that count for any organization > >actually I am looking for any references that compares " with figures and statistics" >between different applications developped using OO and the traditional methods. This, I think is the nub and crux of your problem. The gathering of real empirical data on software development is difficult or impossible. Real software developent companies do not have time to prepare these results for publication, and usually consider them too commercially sensitive. >All what I have found are examples that show OO is workable, for me this >is not an evidence to the significant difference" Sorry, if it's hard evidence you want you probably need to wait another ten years or so at least. However, the anecdotal evidence is that OO is at least as good at getting the job done as conventional techniques, and (very) occasionally spectactularly better. >Another thing, Since you are familiar with OO, >Could you please tell me what is the best environment to develop an OO application, :-), g++, vim, make, purify and ddd on a Sun Ultra Creator 3D with two heads. (sorry guys, sparcworks CC is nice, but debugger *still* bites) I find that Tools.h++ helps a lot, and when I can get it the STL. >( in my case most of our applications are database systems ) Oh, and SYBASE with DbTools.h++ from Roguewave. Seriously that is a very broad question, and depends a great deal on your application domain. This sort of advice is worth what you pay for it. Cheers, H p.s. your lines are too long ... _ Harry Protoolis alt.computer pty ltd harry@alt.net.au software development consultants