Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!att!pacbell.com!ucsd!sdd.hp.com!hplabs!hpcc05!hpdmd48!muyanja
From: muyanja@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (bill muyanja)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: NIH class libraries for Turbo C++
Message-ID: <15150004@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com>
Date: 17 Nov 90 17:56:34 GMT
References: <14440@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Organization: Hewlett Packard - Boise, ID
Lines: 21

>  jim - why in the world am I defending MS-DOS ?!? - miller

Maybe because 40 million users can't all be wrong?

Frankly, I'm starting to wonder about the benefits of the unlimited
linear address space of Un*x, which allow humongous, monolithic software
modules, both in classic and OO "c".  I have yet to see a piece of software
in the Unix world with the price/performance/utility point provided by
Lotus 123 2.01/WordPerfect 4.2/dBase III+ on a 12 MHz AT-clone circa 1987.
This combo is what appealed to those 40 million DOS users.

My (admittedly limited) experience with  OO systems (Actor, C++) has      
convinced me that any benefit from the object metaphor can easily be
outweighed by the cost of learning zillions of new classes/objects.

Whatever happened to the elegant philosophy of Kernighan & Plauger, as
embodied in "Software Tools"?  I feel that the ideas espoused in that
classic apply equally well to c++.


bill - ok, I'm off the soapbox now - muyanja