Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c++:6489 comp.object:943
Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!mtxinu!unisoft!hoptoad!hsfmsh!dumbcat!marc
From: marc@dumbcat.UUCP (Marco S Hyman)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.object
Subject: Re: Inheritance vs. Composition
Summary: Use whichever is right
Message-ID: <136@dumbcat.UUCP>
Date: 14 Feb 90 02:24:58 GMT
References: <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Feb11005056@uunet.UU.NET> <10465@alice.UUCP> <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Feb12100359@uunet.UU.NET>
Organization: MH Software, Hayward, Ca.
Lines: 21

In article <CIMSHOP!DAVIDM.90Feb12100359@uunet.UU.NET> cimshop!davidm@uunet.UU.NET (David S. Masterson) writes:
    Instead of a design model to follow, the approach seems to be more of
    "do what seems right programmatically" and the design will take care
    of itself.  Is this appropriate or do people see the need for more
    "principles" to follow to promote properly designed, reusable code
    development?

You start out trying to follow the right principles but end up satisfying
the customer.  That is, when the ultimate goal is to ``finish the damn thing
and make it work'' you tend to do ``what seems right programmatically.''
How good or bad this is in the long run depends upon the language being used
and the skill level of the programmer.  The more highly skilled the
programmer, the more s/he can do with the language and the more that
``seems right.''  If the language supports the principles you wish to follow
the easier it is to ``do it right.''

Or am I the only one that feels frustrated when real world constraints force
me to program in C or Assembler after I've been having so much fun with
Smalltalk or C++?

// marc				{ames,pyramid,sun}!pacbell!dumbcat!marc