Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rutgers!usc!bbn.com!drilex!dricejb
From: dricejb@drilex.UUCP (Craig Jackson drilex1)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: OO Development Environments
Keywords: C++, Objective C
Message-ID: <15409@drilex.UUCP>
Date: 5 Sep 90 13:19:12 GMT
References: <1716@dinl.mmc.UUCP> <181@srchtec.UUCP> <1719@dinl.mmc.UUCP> <26DC7CC4.266D@tct.uucp> <5514@stpstn.UUCP>
Organization: DRI/McGraw-Hill, Lexington, MA
Lines: 34

In article <5514@stpstn.UUCP> lerman@stpstn.UUCP (Ken Lerman) writes:
|In article <26DC7CC4.266D@tct.uucp> chip@tct.uucp (Chip Salzenberg) writes:
|[...stuff deleted...]
|>                                      Objective-C has a simple state,
|>since it is available from only one vendor.  Such is not the case with
|>C++.  It is mainly for this reason that I have promoted C++ for
|>company use instead of Objective-C.
|
|I know Chip didn't originate the statement that Objective-C is
|available from only one vendor, so this is not a flame at Chip, but I
|feel that I must reiterate (Chuck Noren are you listening? :-)):
|
|Objective-C is available from:
|	The Stepstone Corporation          1
|	IBM                               +1
|	NeXt                              +1
|                                       -------
|					   3
|Objective-C is available (and supported by) three vendors (that I know of).
|Not one.
|
|Of course I have an axe to grind, I work for The Stepstone Corporation.

Perhaps it would be more correct to say that there is only one basic
implementation of Objective-C commercially available, whereas there
are several independent implementations of C++?  However, the real point
is that there is an implementation of C++ (G++) which is available at
negligable cost, especially to the academic/research community where copyleft
is not a concern.  If there were a "GNU Objective-C" in existence, a lot
more people would think it to be a fine language.
-- 
Craig Jackson
dricejb@drilex.dri.mgh.com
{bbn,axiom,redsox,atexnet,ka3ovk}!drilex!{dricej,dricejb}