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: 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: f5d71,7248e7bb77d059e8 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,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: 1996/12/07 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 202826915 references: <32A4659D.347A@shef.ac.uk> <32A5A86A.1AF1@shef.ac.uk> <32A82932.4A73@mci.com> 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: 1996-12-07T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: On Fri, 06 Dec 1996 09:09:54 -0500, Ralph Cook wrote: >Harry Protoolis wrote: >> >> On Wed, 04 Dec 1996 16:35:54 +0000, Ahmed wrote: >> >Harry Protoolis wrote: >> >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. > >And occasionally spectacularly worse. And to say that >individual projects like this have succeeded or failed does NOT >"prove", or even "show", that the language environment used is >"good" or "bad". Point taken, I guess what I am saying is that the hard statistical evidence needed doesn't exist yet. It is too early to call OO a failure, and given all we have is anecdotal evidence, IME the balance is on the positive side H - Harry Protoolis alt.computer pty ltd harry@alt.net.au software development consultants