Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c++:8827 comp.software-eng:4031
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!usc!snorkelwacker!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!fluke!dyndata!dan
From: dan@dyndata.UUCP (Dan Everhart)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: Project experience with C++
Message-ID: <694@dyndata.UUCP>
Date: 6 Aug 90 18:44:20 GMT
References: <812@agcsun.UUCP> <222.26a42b7d@astro.pc.ab.com> <13038@yunexus.YorkU.CA> <294.26b56ac2@astro.pc.ab.com>
Organization: Dynamic Data & Electronics, Edmonds WA
Lines: 14
In-reply-to: klimas@astro.pc.ab.com's message of 31 Jul 90 16:25:54 GMT

In article <294.26b56ac2@astro.pc.ab.com> klimas@astro.pc.ab.com writes:

  Whether C++ is a better OOP than
	   one of the other languages I am not going to initiate yet another
	   language war, I believe that a process of evolutionary natural 
	   selection will resolve the winner much more conclusively than any 
	   articulate debate will.


Eh?  Natural selection != Market dynamics.  After all, we still have
FORTRAN, COBOL, and the 8086 :-)

Besides, articulate debate (not language wars!) is part of what usenet
is all about.