NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #1/NN_1993_1.iso/spool/comp/lang/cplus/19007

Text File | 1993-01-12 | 1.7 KB | 42 lines

Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Path: sparky!uunet!math.fu-berlin.de!Sirius.dfn.de!hpux.rz.uni-jena.de!pdl
From: [e-mail] (Lutz Donnerhacke)
Subject: Re: Reusability will come true bringing by OOP?
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Sender: [e-mail] (The News)
Nntp-Posting-Host: cnve.rz.uni-jena.de
Reply-To: [e-mail] (Lutz Donnerhacke)
Organization: University Jena, Germany
References:  <[e-mail]>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 15:53:56 GMT
Lines: 28


In article <[e-mail]>, [e-mail] (Anthony Shih Hao Lee) writes:
|> so I heard someone write an article (on a magazine) critized C++ is not
|> a good OOPL due to it is not well self-explained.

I think this is due to the programing style. If you program bottom-up, you will mostly
get unuseable code. If you program top-down, you will get better results, but a worst
performance, because you can test you program first if the last low level routine is coded.
example:
  void main(int argc, char **argv)
     {
        TGA-Stream tga(argv[1]);
        PCX-Stream pcx(argv[2],tga.xres(),tga.yres(),tga.colors());
        RGB-Color c;

        while( tga >> c )
          pcx << c;
     }

What's unreadable ?
Sure, now there is a lot of work to implement this classes, but all classes are readable !
?? OR ??

  Lutz (I prefer Smalltalk, because only bottom-up is allowed ;->)
+---------+----------------------------------------------------------------+
|snailMail| Lutz Donnerhacke; Alte Strasse 5; O-6902 Jena-Lobeda 1; Germany|
|eMail    | [e-mail]   <[e-mail]>|
+---------+-------------------------------------------------------------L&C+