home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: austern@isolde.mti.sgi.com (Matt Austern)
- Message-ID: <AUSTERN.96Jan17133343@isolde.mti.sgi.com>
- X-Original-Date: 17 Jan 1996 21:33:43 GMT
- Path: in2.uu.net!bounce-back
- Date: 18 Jan 96 02:36:47 GMT
- Approved: fjh@cs.mu.oz.au
- Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
- Subject: Re: STL still in standard
- Organization: SGI
- References: <4dd7on$djk@rc1.vub.ac.be> <4dgrb4$a2e@engnews1.Eng.Sun.COM>
- <4dj7eu$2sp@news.ios.com>
- Reply-To: austern@mti.mti.sgi.com
- In-Reply-To: aishdas@haven.ios.com's message of 17 Jan 1996 12:22:21 PST
- X-Auth: PGPMoose V1.1 PGP comp.std.c++
- iQBFAgUBMP2yUOEDnX0m9pzZAQGDoAF+KQ2iYlyeEb1TkPW3DlQOs2Ek+FqlVa4x
- 2opwkqBhOgxNhENRE7C49FdI+dnqS4FW
- =7+aI
-
- In article <4dj7eu$2sp@news.ios.com> aishdas@haven.ios.com (Micha Berger)
- writes:
-
- > STL just isn't OO. It's the creation of algorythms that are not connected
- > to the data they act upon. That doesn't make STL inherently wrong, but it
- > does seem out of place in light of the number of design decisions made
- > to enable OO.
-
- It's true that STL isn't an object-oriented library; it was never
- supposed to be. It enables generic programming, which is a valuable
- technique in its own right.
-
- There's no reason why every C++ library should be object-oriented: The
- design goal of C++ has always been to support object-oriented
- programming, but to support other styles of programming too. Bjarne
- Stroustrup discusses this in great detail in D&E.
- --
- Matt Austern
- SGI: MTI Compilers Group
- austern@isolde.mti.sgi.com
- ---
- [ comp.std.c++ is moderated. Submission address: std-c++@ncar.ucar.edu.
- Contact address: std-c++-request@ncar.ucar.edu. The moderation policy
- is summarized in http://dogbert.lbl.gov/~matt/std-c++/policy.html. ]
-