Collection interfaces

[Topmind]

> I can imagine some limited places where this would be so, or some
> constraints that would make this so, but it is hard to imagine on a project
> with any depth.  I did procedural and 4GL for 15 years, and Smalltalk for 5.
> I helped write a major system in Smalltalk at the same time our competitor
> wrote something from nearly identical specs.  Ours cost 1/3 of theirs,
> supplied more features, and is far more flexible.  Perhaps you can provide
> specifics to enlighten us as to what you have found procedural to do better.
> 

Anecdotes can be used to prove anything. I used to keep copies of
OO projects gone bad. 

Of course, when they go bad, you blame it on the programmers,
and when it goes good, you give the paradigm the credit.

Double standOOrd.

Do you know what killed Smalltalk's market? VB!
I am not saying VB is wonderful, but to be killed by
VB is not saying much for Smalltalk.


> "Topmind" <topmind at technologist.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1506d244a87ac34b9896c3 at news.earthlink.net...
> > > > Using procedural and table techniques, I have matched
> > > > Smalltalk "can-you-do-this" challenges in the past,
> > > > and usually with more K.I.S.S.
> > >
> ...> OO is far more Guru-oriented than anything before it. It is
> > generating tons of lore, scriptures, and meditation materials
> > without any objective proof or metrics that it is better...
> 

-tmind-