Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!uh2
From: UH2@psuvm.psu.edu (Lee Sailer)
Newsgroups: comp.software-eng
Subject: Re: OO Design with "C" - Do we still get benefits
Message-ID: <91087.141220UH2@psuvm.psu.edu>
Date: 28 Mar 91 19:12:20 GMT
References: <1991Mar22.212448.21375@news.larc.nasa.gov> <1353@glinda.ctron.com>
Organization: Penn State University
Lines: 15

In article <1353@glinda.ctron.com>, smith@glinda.ctron.com (Larry Smith) says:

>In my experience, mostly with the Motif widgets, any attempt to use C for o-o
>programming will lead to a large morass of Obfuscated C Contest material.

It certainly might.  One good idea is to look carefully at how OBJ-C, C++,
that that other C+Objects language (CO2?) are *imlemented*.  Pick one as a
model, and sort of do things that way.  Appoint one member of the team to
be a sort of OO lawyer, who examines other people's code to be sure that
code is using the OO paradigm where it could and should.

Probably the biggest obstacle to building an OO-like system in vanilla C
using traditionally trained C programmers is that they will naturally tend
to turn out traditional, vanilla C programs, no matter what the design looks
like.