Xdg-list digest, Vol 1 #441 - 14 msgs

[Linas Vepstas]

> From: David Faure <dfaure at trolltech.com>
> Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2003 12:19:47 +0200
> 
> But declaring as "standard" a library that patches up an incomplete home-made object 
> concept on top of a language that doesn't support objects, is nonsense: if people
> want to use objects, they have a real OO programming language for that: C++.

Uhh, this is another political opinion.  

I wrote a large (the first, actually) web-based airline reservation
system in C++,  even used STL for a chunk of it.  There's a certain
fondness in my heart for C++, but, well, I find that the world 
of C with 'homebrew' objects is actually, umm, prefereable, for
most things that I find I work on.   C++ doesn't really give me
the things I need/want out of OO: signals, persistance, marshalling, 
dynamic-any, introspection, object factories, etc. etc.   The glib
gobjects sort-of do, I suppose the jury is out, though.

So please don't be a C++ biggot, C is perfectly good for OO, and even
better in certain psychological ways. More freedom.  Besides, I thought
that everyone knew that scheme was the best langauge in the world  :-)

--linas


-- 
pub  1024D/01045933 2001-02-01 Linas Vepstas (Labas!) <linas at linas.org>
PGP Key fingerprint = 8305 2521 6000 0B5E 8984  3F54 64A9 9A82 0104 5933