Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!drutx!clive
From: clive@drutx.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Re: software ICs (was Re: C++ vs Objective-C)
Message-ID: <5793@drutx.ATT.COM>
Date: Mon, 2-Nov-87 02:07:22 EST
Article-I.D.: drutx.5793
Posted: Mon Nov  2 02:07:22 1987
Date-Received: Wed, 4-Nov-87 20:23:24 EST
References: <2614@zeus.TEK.COM>
Organization: resident visitor
Lines: 39

in article <2614@zeus.TEK.COM>, bobr@zeus.TEK.COM (Robert Reed) says:

 (about non o-o libraries vs o-o (libraries))

> This flies in the face of examples like qsort() which, through the use of
> specialist functions, are type independent.  Object oriented programming is
> not THE answer, it is simply AN answer.

Please, can't this orientation stop? (heretics shouldn't be enthusiastic about 
thinking their new thoughts, or they'll be drawn and quartered).
This discussion group was doing so well without it.

Yes, with careful thought, many general functions can be written 
usefully as non-object libraries.  

But isn't it true that qsort, as libraried, is already half way to an
object oriented form; you pass the list you have, its parameters,
and a compare method to match this object.  

An object-oriented language just greatly simplifies the problems of 
arranging this kind of operation, in the general case.  The messy details 
all get taken care of dependably, without the programmer having to think 
about it.

And much more important, the reorientation of thinking needed 
to get dependable generality also occurs automatically, because the
language directly expresses this special form of thought.

I'm sure by now, most of us would much rather write 'while' statements,
than replicate their interior detail directly with compares and gotos, which
remains the underlying method.

Isn't it just the same kind of thought advance we're looking for with
object orientation:  another form of  abstraction, which guarantees
certain things coming out right, just as structured programming
results in its own forms of compression and stability?


Clive Steward