Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!rutgers!bellcore!faline!ulysses!allegra!alice!ark
From: ark@alice.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.misc,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: C++ vs Objective-C
Message-ID: <7297@alice.UUCP>
Date: Tue, 22-Sep-87 13:37:46 EDT
Article-I.D.: alice.7297
Posted: Tue Sep 22 13:37:46 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 25-Sep-87 01:18:24 EDT
References: <3405@ece-csc.UUCP> <638@its63b.ed.ac.uk> <1811@watcgl.waterloo.edu> <1971@tekig5.TEK.COM>
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Liberty Corner NJ
Lines: 11
Xref: mnetor comp.lang.misc:677 comp.lang.smalltalk:328 comp.lang.c++:445

In article <1971@tekig5.TEK.COM>, tomm@tekig5.UUCP writes:
> Beneath all of it, 
> though, BOTH ARE C not "C and Simula", or "C and Smalltalk".  The notion that 
> in Objective-C you have to deal with "Smalltalk objects" and/or "C objects" 
> and that this makes things un-unified is bogus.  There are only C structures 
> in both C++ and Objective-C.

This statement is both literally true and uninteresting.

After all, since C compiles into machine language, there are only
machine language structures in C.