Subject: Re: [hackers-il] re: next programming paradigm

From: Mayer Goldberg <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 18:42:00 +0300

I would suggest that C++ isn't an object oriented language by the standards of the 
designer of the original object oriented lanuage -- Smalltalk. Actually -- Smalltalk is 
the only object oriented language I know of. 

Mayer
---------- Original Message ----------

>In an interview with Alex Sepanov, one of the authors of C++'s STL, he
>proclaims that Object Oriented Programming, which is how most systems
>are written today (AFAIK) is a bad, misleading way to design software.

>Stepanov suggests using Generic Programming. 
>What is Generic Programming? 

>quoting: "Generic programming is a programming method that is based in
>finding the most abstract representations of efficient algorithms. That
>is, you start with an algorithm and find the most general set of
>requirements that allows it to perform and to perform efficiently."

>http://www.stlport.org/resources/StepanovUSA.html

>He also has some (not so flattering) comments on AI.
>What do you think?
>-- 
>mulix

>linux/reboot.h: #define LINUX_REBOOT_MAGIC1 0xfee1dead

>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>You have a voice mail message waiting for you at iHello.com:
>http://click.egroups.com/1/3555/9/_/_/_/957776062/
>------------------------------------------------------------------------

>To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
>[email-masked]

---

From: Moshe Zadka <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 8 May 2000 20:30:05 +0300 (IDT)

> the only object oriented language I know of. 

Define object-oriented.
Not to encourage flamewars: Why isn't Java OO? Eiffel? Sather? Cecil?
CLOS?

It seems your defintion of OO is "being smalltalk"

PS
I left out Python to make this discussion remotely unemotional.

--
Moshe Zadka <[email-masked]>
http://www.oreilly.com/news/prescod_0300.html
http://www.linux.org.il -- we put the penguin in .com

---

From: mulix <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 05:54:00 +0300 (EET DST)

By stroustoup's definition, C++ indeed is not an object oriented
language. It is a multi paradigm langauge, which allows you to use the
paradigm known as OOP, but does not force you to, as does Smalltalk (or
Java).
See Stroustroup's FAQ, at:
http://www.research.att.com/~bs/bs_faq.html#Object-Oriented language

 --
mulix

---

From: Moshe Zadka <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 9 May 2000 08:42:16 +0300 (IDT)

On Tue, 9 May 2000, mulix wrote:

> paradigm known as OOP,

However, any sane person knows that C++ does not allow you to use OOP: it 
allows you to have a weak shadow of the OOP paradigm. Of course, so does
every language except Cecil and similar multi-method multi-inheritance
languages. So, yes, even Smalltalk's OO (and Python) is a far cry from
perfect. However, it is lightyears better then the drain bamaged C++
object model (oh yes! please screw me because someone did not have the
foresight forgot to put "virtual"! I really enjoy micro-optimizing all the
time)

Of course, the obvious conclusion is that Bjorn has no idea what he's
talking about.
--
Moshe Zadka <[email-masked]>
http://www.oreilly.com/news/prescod_0300.html
http://www.linux.org.il -- we put the penguin in .com