Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!zephyr.ens.tek.com!tektronix!sequent!mntgfx!plogan
From: plogan@mentor.com (Patrick Logan)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: Guthery slams OOP
Message-ID: <1989Nov28.004005.3482@mentor.com>
Date: 28 Nov 89 00:40:05 GMT
Organization: engr
Lines: 24

I have not seen the DDJ article but I have read some things from his
OOPSLA presentation. They seem to be basically the same.

I agree with most responders that his arguments use incorrect logic and
slanted examples. I came away with two useful points, though.

(1) It is good to scan through papers like this to be prepared for
responding when it may really count. I.e. someone you work for may
have similar opinions. I've had other people in the past challenge my
claims for object-oriented programming. Now that OOP is becoming
over-rated instead of under-rated, this may not occur much.

(2) In the paper I read he mentioned (several times) the lack of hard
data for claims of productivity. This is largely true, sorely lacking,
and difficult to gather as well as apply.

Can anyone provide evidence to the contrary for point #2?

Thanks.

-- 
Patrick Logan                | ...!{decwrl,sequent,tessi}!mntgfx!plogan 
Mentor Graphics Corporation  | plogan@pdx.MENTOR.COM                    
Beaverton, Oregon            |


Brought to you by Super Global Mega Corp .com