[Info-vax] And another one bites the dust....

[Simon Clubley]

On 2022-02-17, Arne Vajhøj <arne at vajhoej.dk> wrote:
> On 2/17/2022 9:42 AM, Bill Gunshannon wrote:
>> 
>> I was going to comment on this but didn't.  Now, however, I will
>> once again point out that OOP is not a universal panacea.  every
>> thing is not an object.  And sometimes the older paradigms are
>> actually better for the task at hand.
>
> The benefits of OO are pretty widely accepted. And almost everything
> can be considered an object.
>

DEC certainly thought so back in the middle/late 1980s.

> OOP is obviously not the only valuable approach, but if looking at
> the OOP languages actually used then they are usually multi-paradigm:
> - practically all support procedural programming
> - most support functional programming
> - most support generic programming
>
> So it is not like the use of one of those languages only work
> if everything is OOP centric - it makes sense if just some of it
> is OOP centric.
>

And this is nothing new. Mica was going to be an object based OS,
but the objects could still be used with procedural languages.

Simon.

-- 
Simon Clubley, clubley at remove_me.eisner.decus.org-Earth.UFP
Walking destinations on a map are further away than they appear.