Newsgroups: comp.lang.lisp,comp.lang.scheme
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!cornellcs!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!portc01.blue.aol.com!cliffs.rs.itd.umich.edu!howland.erols.net!EU.net!Norway.EU.net!nntp.uio.no!nntp.uib.no!torget.bgnett.no!Hamartun.Priv.NO!news
From: Tom I Helbekkmo <tih@hamartun.priv.no>
Subject: Re: OOP, Flavors and CLOS: or What's the big deal?
X-Newsreader: Gnus v5.3/Emacs 19.34
Sender: tih@barsoom.Hamartun.Priv.NO
Organization: T&T
Message-ID: <86ybet6tqe.fsf@barsoom.Hamartun.Priv.NO>
References: <5946tu$2pmq@news.doit.wisc.edu> <E2KB7M.5FM@world.std.com>
X-Nntp-Posting-Host: barsoom.hamartun.priv.no
Date: Fri, 20 Dec 1996 16:54:41 GMT
Lines: 17
Xref: glinda.oz.cs.cmu.edu comp.lang.lisp:24333 comp.lang.scheme:17764

[Will Ware]

> I've never made a big effort myself to write reusable code. Absent any
> applicable experience, my impression is that the standard OOP ideas are
> good, but you need to spend time planning carefully to use them well.

I think this is a very important point.  An OO programming language
may arguably make it easier to write reusable code, but the buck stops
with the programmer: you have to make the effort, and if you don't
care enough to do the job right -- well, "real programmers can write
FORTRAN in any language".

My guess is that the programmer is more important than the language.

-tih
-- 
Popularity is the hallmark of mediocrity.  --Niles Crane, "Frasier"
