Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!csmil.umich.edu
From: cash@csmil.umich.edu (Howard Cash)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.programmer
Subject: Re: OOP & LSP (oops, Think Pascal)
Message-ID: <1079@mailrus.cc.umich.edu>
Date: 21 May 89 18:24:01 GMT
References: <1384@ndmath.UUCP> <1927@internal.Apple.COM> <18612@cup.portal.com> <1887@husc6.harvard.edu>
Sender: usenet@mailrus.cc.umich.edu
Reply-To: cash@csmil.umich.edu (Howard Cash)
Organization: Cognitive Science and Machine Intelligence Laboratory
Lines: 30


                   <1887@husc6.harvard.edu> Rich Siegel wrote:
$> [part of original question about converting from conventional to 
$> object code]
$
$      I've done precisely this; I have a program of moderate size (~20,000
$ lines of code, 170K built) that uses multiple document types, and 
$ as such was an ideal candidate for a rewrite in Object Pascal. There are no
$ special tricks,  but remember that inheritance is your friend. In some cases
$ I was able to cut the amount of source in half or even more...
$
$      The program took about two weeks to rewrite, and is much easier to 
$ debug and maintain, since in many cases there's only one set of UI code
$ to maintain.

$  Rich Siegel
$  Staff Software Developer
$  Symantec Corporation, Language Products Group

I am writing a fairly large program using LSC and this kind of posting 
gives me pause.  Apple Computer tells us we shoutld all concentrate on
object oriented languages.  A respected engineer at the company that 
MAKES my favorite C compiler says that Object Pascal improves the 
maintainability of his software.

Question:  Am I making a mistake by doing my development in LSC?

howard cash                               "I think, therefore I earn"  -dc
cash@csmil.umich.edu
Phone: (313)663-0156