Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!jarthur!petunia!kestrel.edu!gyro
From: gyro@kestrel.edu (Scott Layson)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: Which OOPL is the best?
Summary: All of them!
Message-ID: <1991Mar25.174759.5612@kestrel.edu>
Date: 25 Mar 91 17:47:59 GMT
References: <1991Mar25.045952.813@agate.berkeley.edu>
Organization: Kestrel Institute, Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 15

In article <1991Mar25.045952.813@agate.berkeley.edu> labc-1ia@web-4d.berkeley.edu (Andrew M. Choi) writes:
>Would someone please help me out?  I don't want to spend all my
>time learning dozens of OOPL's, only to find out that there is
>still a better OOPL to learn.

Why not?  There probably always will be better ones being developed.
Once you learn two, the third will be much easier, and the fourth
easier yet.

The languages you listed are all good suggestions.  I would add
Haskell; although I don't know it, I have heard some very interesting
things about it, and would like to learn it myself.

-- Scott Layson Burson
Gyro@Reasoning.COM