lies about OOP

[Mike Thompson]

Paul McGuire wrote:
> "Jive" <someone at microsoft.com> wrote in message
> news:Revvd.807843$SM5.50718 at news.easynews.com...
> 
> <snip>
> 
>>But by '86, the Joy of OOP was widely known.
>>
> 
> 
> "Widely known"?  Errr?  In 1986, "object-oriented" programming was barely
> marketing-speak.  Computing hardware in the mid-80's just wasn't up to the
> task of dealing with OO memory and "messaging" overhead.  Apple Macs were
> still coding in C and Forth.  Borland didn't ship Turbo-Pascal with
> Object-Oriented programming until 1989, and Turbo-C++ shipped in 1991.
> Smalltalk had been around for 10 years by 1986, but it was still a
> curiosity, hardly "widely known."  It wasn't until the publication of David
> Taylor's "Object Technology: A Manager's Guide" in 1990 that OOP began to be
> legitimized to many management decision makers, that it was more than just
> "fairy dust" (as Bill Gates had characterized it in an attempt to discredit
> Borland's forays into the field).

In my view THAT byte article on Smalltalk in the early '80 was the 
beginning.

Then came Brad Cox's book.

Then there was Glockenspiel's C++ for PC in about '87 or '88. And, of 
course, cfont on unix from about, what, '85?

Across the late '80s there was, of course, Eiffel which seemed a 
remarkable piece of work for the time. And was backed by a terrific book 
by Myer.

Then it all seemed to take off once C++ version 2.0 was minted.

> 
> I would pick the publication of "Design Patterns" in 1995 by the Gang of
> Four (Gamma, Helm, Johnson, and Vlissides),  to be the herald of when "the
> Joy of OOP" would be "widely known."  DP formalized a taxonomy for many of
> the heuristics that had evolved only intuitively up until then.  Its
> emergence reflects a general maturation of concept and practice, sufficient
> to say that the Joy of OOP could be said to be "widely known."
> 

In actual fact, virtually all the design patterns came from the 
Interviews C++ GUI toolkit written in the early '90s. What an utterly 
brilliant piece of work that was.

--
Mike