Comments on: CUSEC day 2 morning: Agile at Motorola and Modular Concurrency http://jfcouture.com/2006/01/23/cusec-day-2-morning-agile-at-motorola-and-modular-concurrency/ Sun, 05 Sep 2010 08:50:37 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Peter Grogono http://jfcouture.com/2006/01/23/cusec-day-2-morning-agile-at-motorola-and-modular-concurrency/#comment-56 Peter Grogono Thu, 13 Apr 2006 14:38:36 +0000 http://www.jfcouture.com/?p=31#comment-56 Hi djief, I am sorry that you were not able to understand my examples; I will try to be clearer in future. Of course you can do stupid stuff in any language - everyone knows that. What I attempted to show was that in any OOPL, not just Java, the language can seriously stab you in the back. Discovering that someone is molesting your privates can be a nightmare in a 100KloC program but I could not fit 100KLoC onto a slide, so I simplified. I agree that 20 lines of setup look pretty silly for "Hello, world" but they don't look so silly in that 100KLoC program. I needed them to explain key features of the paradigm - maybe that didn't get across fully - and, in any case, I hope that most of them can be eliminated in subsequent versions of the language. I included the "useless and pointless OOP (Java) bashing" because I am unhappy about the current almost universal acceptance of OOP. OOP is good, but not good enough. We can, and must, do better. Thank you for commenting on my talk. Best wishes, Peter Hi djief,

I am sorry that you were not able to understand my examples; I will try to be clearer in future. Of course you can do stupid stuff in any language - everyone knows that. What I attempted to show was that in any OOPL, not just Java, the language can seriously stab you in the back. Discovering that someone is molesting your privates can be a nightmare in a 100KloC program but I could not fit 100KLoC onto a slide, so I simplified.

I agree that 20 lines of setup look pretty silly for “Hello, world” but they don’t look so silly in that 100KLoC program. I needed them to explain key features of the paradigm - maybe that didn’t get across fully - and, in any case, I hope that most of them can be eliminated in subsequent versions of the language.

I included the “useless and pointless OOP (Java) bashing” because I am unhappy about the current almost universal acceptance of OOP. OOP is good, but not good enough. We can, and must, do better.

Thank you for commenting on my talk.
Best wishes,
Peter

]]>