Re: abstraction (was: Re: Give me a break)

Article View: comp.std.c++

Article #64

#64

From: Christopher Hecker
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:02

15 lines
1191 bytes

>|Now, how about addressing the point: if you agree that it is possible to
>|write an efficient class library that does a good job of abstracting the
>|problem domain, why didn't Microsoft do it?  
>The MFC people did do so, you just disagree with them as to what "the 
>job" is.

I guess so.

>I argue simply: if MFC isn't doing a good job, then why are several 
>other C++ compiler houses licensing it for distribution with their compilers?

Hmm, I'm not sure you want to make this argument.  Carried to its
extreme, we could say, why are so many people using OWL?

Chris

Technical Details

Message-ID: <1992Jul23.020241.11513@cmcl2.nyu.edu>

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!gumby!yale!yale.edu!cmcl2!acf3!checker

References:

<1992Jul11.202006.23342@cmcl2.nyu.edu> <1992Jul13.184652.7610@microsoft.com> <1992Jul17.215414.15202@cmcl2.nyu.edu> <1992Jul20.232555.27851@microsoft.com>

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Newsgroups: comp.std.c++
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!gumby!yale!yale.edu!cmcl2!acf3!checker
From: checker@acf3.nyu.edu (Christopher Hecker)
Subject: Re: abstraction (was: Re: Give me a break)
Message-ID: <1992Jul23.020241.11513@cmcl2.nyu.edu>
Sender: notes@cmcl2.nyu.edu (Notes Person)
Nntp-Posting-Host: acf3.nyu.edu
Organization: New York University
References: <1992Jul11.202006.23342@cmcl2.nyu.edu> <1992Jul13.184652.7610@microsoft.com> <1992Jul17.215414.15202@cmcl2.nyu.edu> <1992Jul20.232555.27851@microsoft.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 02:02:41 GMT
Lines: 16

Reply to Parent Message