Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!gem.mps.ohio-state.edu!apple!oliveb!mipos3!omepd!merlyn
From: merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: What is OOP?
Message-ID: <5065@omepd.UUCP>
Date: 16 Oct 89 20:10:09 GMT
References: <1208@skye.ed.ac.uk>
Sender: news@omepd.UUCP
Reply-To: merlyn@iwarp.intel.com (Randal Schwartz)
Organization: Stonehenge; netaccess via Intel, Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
Lines: 25
In-reply-to: jeff@aiai.ed.ac.uk (Jeff Dalton)

In article <1208@skye.ed.ac.uk>, jeff@aiai (Jeff Dalton) writes:
| I suspect that one reason for all the confusion and for all the
| dogmatic definitions of "object-oriented" is some people will
| claim almost anything is object-oriented.  In a sense, they're
| right, because you can "think objects" in almost any language.
| But once someone says Ada is object-oriented because it has
| overloading, just for example, someone else will come up with
| a definition that rules out overloading as having anything to
| to with OOP.

Is this a comment about people's religious views of what it
means to be "object-oriented", or about Ada in particular? :-)

If the second, I'll throw in...

"Ada is PL/1 trying to be Smalltalk"

(no flames back please... either like it, or don't! :-)

Just another SmallTalker, stuck in this UNIX-compatible world...
-- 
/== Randal L. Schwartz, Stonehenge Consulting Services (503)777-0095 ====\
| on contract to Intel's iWarp project, Hillsboro, Oregon, USA, Sol III  |
| merlyn@iwarp.intel.com ...!uunet!iwarp.intel.com!merlyn	         |
\== Cute Quote: "Welcome to Oregon... Home of the California Raisins!" ==/