Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!mntgfx!msellers
From: msellers@mentor.com (Mike Sellers)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: OOP Not Ready for Prime Time
Message-ID: <1989Oct17.010459.18914@mentor.com>
Date: 17 Oct 89 01:04:59 GMT
Organization: engr
Lines: 35

John Coolidge writes:
>guthery@acw.UUCP (Scott Guthery) writes:
>>I gave a talk at an OOPSLA '89 workshop in New Orleans last week entitled
>>"Twenty-Five Reasons Why Object-Oriented Programming Isn't Ready For
>>Commercial Use".  I'd be happy to send a copy of my vugraphs to anyone
>>considering committing a real programming project to OOP. 
> 
> Why not post the list (with commentary) to the net? I wish I'd seen the
> talk.
> 
> It might be quite interesting to those of us who are already in the
> middle of major programming projects using OOP (ours is an operating
> system...). Of course, we _are_ in a university environment, but it's
> hoped that the code we're producing will see the light of day someday...
> 
> --John

I agree with John.  I've been involved in a large (multi-100K-lines of code), 
commercial, prime-time project in C++ for almost 3 years, so I'd like to
discuss your "25 reasons."  (The project is a 3D geometric modeling and
analysis system sold under the name of Package Station).  

I'm not trying to start a flame war (really), but on the face of it I'd say
the relative success of certain commercial projects belies the title of
your talk.  Or were you aiming at a specific type of object-oriented
programming?  In any event, I'm sure your points contain solid information
that could help us all view our own OOP efforts more effectively.  If you
don't mind, I think this forum is the perfect place to discuss issues 
such as this one.

-- 
Mike Sellers                ...!tektronix!sequent!mntgfx!msellers
Mentor Graphics Corp.                  msellers@mntgfx.MENTOR.COM
Electronic Packaging and Analysis Division -- AutoSurface Project
            "Amor est magis cognitivus quam cognitio"