Re: C++ and Java

Article View: comp.lang.java

Article #9

From: Christopher Price
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 00:24

24 lines
1516 bytes

On Sun, 08 Oct 1995 03:00:48 -0600, Nelson Yu
<nyu@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca> wrote:
>
[snap snap]

>Albeit you can't compare OWL with AWT, which has fairly 
>complicated hierarchy that uses multiple inheritance extensively, 
>'cause they are suited for different purposes.

Many of the methodology gurus have stated (sorry I'm not chasing the 
reference here) that single inheritence leads to poor design.

This axiom (I've taken it to heart) is one foundation for good OO
technology of the future  for complex projects.

However I am very keen on getting stuck into Java, as the distributed 
program potential that it has.  The single inheritence limitation
however places a limit (IMHO) on the complexity of the programs, but
the Internet-distributed code for dynamic web objects may be best
served by smallish object designs. Hence Java may well  be ideal for
its purpose. 

Does anybody  counter the notion that you are not going to see huge
code segements sent over the wire?

Technical Details

Message-ID: <45ceei$h3g@st-james.comp.vuw.ac.nz>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!usenet

References:

<4535bv$cfr@susscsc1.rdg.ac.uk> <453vg1$d7j@scapa.cs.ualberta.ca> <4565t8$u5q@hopi.gate.net> <30779340.64E4@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!comp.vuw.ac.nz!usenet
From: branzcgp@branz.org.nz (Christopher Price)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.java,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: C++ and Java
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 1995 00:24:56 GMT
Organization: Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand.
Message-ID: <45ceei$h3g@st-james.comp.vuw.ac.nz>
References: <4535bv$cfr@susscsc1.rdg.ac.uk> <453vg1$d7j@scapa.cs.ualberta.ca> <4565t8$u5q@hopi.gate.net> <30779340.64E4@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc021.branz.org.nz
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99a.107

Reply to Parent Message