Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!uwm.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!pt.cs.cmu.edu!sei!ajpo!eberard
From: eberard@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu (Edward Berard)
Newsgroups: comp.object
Subject: Re: A Closer Look At the Recursive/Parallel (OO) Life-Cycle
Summary: Recursive/Parallel is _not_ exclusively for OO languages
Message-ID: <642@ajpo.sei.cmu.edu>
Date: 5 Jan 90 01:28:28 GMT
References: <16836@isvax.isl.melco.co.jp> <1487@castle.ed.ac.uk>
Lines: 24

In article <1487@castle.ed.ac.uk>, nick@lfcs.ed.ac.uk (Nick Rothwell) writes:
> Why is your "recursive/parallel" life-cycle idea tied to
> object-oriented languages? I use the same approach when programming in
> ML, except that (i) my "objects" don't usually have state, and (ii)
> there's no inheritance mechanism. I think that everything else you
> mention in your article pretty much carries through.

	1. The recursive/parallel life-cycle is _not_ tied exclusively
	   to object-oriented programming languages. It did originate
	   chiefly out of attempts to apply object-oriented thinking
	   to life-cycle phases other than the coding phase. However,
	   I would not make the claim that it is only appropriate for
	   "purely object-oriented approaches."

	2. Like anything else in the technical arena, I am sure that
	   the approach has been used in some form by a good number of
	   people, who called it something else. All I did was attempt
	   to describe the process.

Thank you for your input. I would be interested in hearing from others
on the recursive/parallel life-cycle.

				-- Ed Berard
				   (301) 353-9652