> > They just sound good. There is nothing anyone is saying that hasn't
> > been said before. All we're really doing is re-inventing the same > > wheels, over and over. > > > > Well, sure, but the state of the art still advances, albeit > slowly. OOP has advantages over procedural code, in the right > venue. VMs improve. The engines of "new" languages like > Python and Ruby are built on the lessons learned of the > previous generations, of Pascal and Modula and Perl. Advances > are made, but they are generational. >From a tools point of view, there isn't a single "advance" that couldn't have been done with the macro assembler, from structured to object oriented programming and beyond, and that will remain true so long as these machines are binary in nature. But it's not the tools that matter so much as the accomplishments and the social consequences. From these standpoints we're losing, not gaining, ground - despite all that glitters. Bill > -- > Ted Roche _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
