OOP -- cleaned up house

The article I was talking about in SIGPLAN Notices:

Page 18, June 2002:

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=571727.571731&dl=GUIDE&dl=ACM&idx=J706&part=periodical&WantType=periodical&title=ACM%20SIGPLAN%20Notices&CFID=15225453&CFTOKEN=25806892

You can't get it there unless you are a member but it is on line at:

http://csis.pace.edu/~bergin/patterns/ppoop.html

The article has the same program implemented in different ways.  My original point was 
that these are still the same program and they do the same things in the same order -- 
that the actual program has an existence which is independent of its implementation.

I say this to contrast to people that say that C++ programs are different than the same 
program written in C -- it is just a different implementation of the same thing.

And, Dung "Zung" Nguyen makes the argument against my point of view:

http://www.owlnet.rice.edu/~comp212/99-fall/handouts/week1/person/

I understand his argument, but don't agree.  He also illustrates that just using an OOP 
programing language doesn't mean that you are really doing OOP.  This is even more true 
with C++.  I find much code that isn't really OOP written with C++.

--
JRT


Kde-cafe mailing list - [email protected]
http://ofb.biz/lists/listinfo.cgi/kde-cafe

DISCLAIMER: The views expressed on this mailinglist are the personal
opinions of the author and do not represent OfB.biz: Open for Business, KDE or the author's employer.