kornfein@england.crd.ge.com (07/26/90)
Has anyone recieved the conference announcement and registration from
for the OOPSLA conference. I know it was suppose to be out in June, but I have
not received a copy and niether has anyone else here.
I need this form to get approval to go to this conference from management.
Thanks,
Mark Kornfein
kornfein@crd.ge.com
===============================================================================
Mark Kornfein INET: kornfein@crd.ge.com
GE Corporate R&D Center UUCP: uunet!crd.ge.com!kornfein
Schenectady, NY kornfein@england.crd.ge.com (04/11/91)
Newsgroups: comp.object Subject: Re: The Emperor Strikes Lethe Summary: Expires: References: <43.UUL1.3#913@acw.UUCP> <890@puck.mrcu> Sender: Reply-To: kornfein.crd.ge.com (Mark M. Kornfein) Followup-To: Distribution: Organization: General Electric Corp. R&D, Schenectady, NY Keywords: In article <890@puck.mrcu> paj@uk.co.gec-mrc (Paul Johnson) writes: >In article <43.UUL1.3#913@acw.UUCP> guthery@acw.UUCP (Scott Guthery) writes: >[Brief summary of events wrt his `Doctor Dobbs' article] >>1) Where's the evidence? >> >>Some is starting to come in. OOP seems to make writing code a little easier. >>It certainly gives us the opportunity once again to rewrite everything and >>this means job security for programmers. About every 10 years in programming >>we have to change syntax and OOP is the change for the 90's. OOP does seem >>to be harder to debug, harder to test, and harder to maintain when the >>maintainers are not the developers. > >Umm. Can you provide references? How was complexity measured? In our experience we have found OO code more difficult to debug. This seems to stem mostly from inheritence which while saving code has the drawback that it is very hard to follow flow of control of the system. This feature makes tracing bugs often difficult, especially if you didn't write the code to start with. Another problem is that OO people must be trained more than in procedural languages. My impression is that if not carefully trained and done right OO programming presents greater risks of producing "spaghetti code" than procedural systems. Dynamic binding of methods can be as misused as assigned goto's. >>3) What's the cost of OOP code reuse? >> >>[text deleted] > >This is because C++ is a brain damaged language. Go look at Eiffel or >Smalltalk. Objective-C I do not know about. Its used a lot less than >C++, so there is probably not much call for new IC packs. I expect >that companies using Objective-C have reused their own code though. While I do not want to get in a discussion of C++ for better or worse it is the major OO language in use. The discussion on the net on paying for code reuse shows it's difficulties. Standard class libraries that come with some OO languages do seem to be a major advantage of OO systems. =============================================================================== Mark Kornfein INET: kornfein@crd.ge.com GE Corporate R&D Center UUCP: uunet!crd.ge.com!kornfein Schenectady, NY