Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid>
Newsgroups: alt.folklore.computers,comp.os.linux.misc
Subject: Re: TeX and Pascal [was Re: The joy of FORTRAN]
Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2024 13:43:31 +0100
Organization: A little, after lunch
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <vdgqpj$2nhjk$14@dont-email.me>
References: <pan$96411$d204da43$cc34bb91$1fe98651@linux.rocks>
 <5mqdnZuGq4lgwm_7nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <vcub5c$36h63$1@dont-email.me> <1r0e6u9.1tubjrt1kapeluN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>
 <vcuib9$37rge$5@dont-email.me> <vcvuhh$3hroa$2@dont-email.me>
 <llhieuF8ej2U2@mid.individual.net> <20240925083451.00003205@gmail.com>
 <Pascal-20240925164718@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <mdd4j63pmo1.fsf_-_@panix5.panix.com>
 <oJ-cnQSrLZDYdGX7nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@earthlink.com>
 <vdatb6$1l4ch$8@dont-email.me> <vdauah$1lq1u$1@dont-email.me>
 <20240930110933.00002ec1@gmail.com>
 <appeal-20240930203239@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <20240930135208.00004170@gmail.com>
 <OOP-20240930220855@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de>
 <20240930162717.0000340b@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 01 Oct 2024 14:43:31 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="dcb66500665ee9a2130a1ee3d87e7312";
	logging-data="2868852"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+sZSWlMHJayRYM+V29ABGAaIXzKsL5L14="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Eq0WGRPcD/JEcP/68hVzKYwvnU0=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <20240930162717.0000340b@gmail.com>
Bytes: 2888

On 01/10/2024 00:27, John Ames wrote:
> I think the
> true appeal of OOP (as I see it) is that it's an extension of the
> *concept*  of data structures; that is, it's a way of organizing data
> into discrete structures that (when designed well, anyway) map neatly
> to entities in the model of the problem the program is meant to solve.
> But in addition to raw data, OOP allows the programmer to package the
> *operations*  inherent to an entity right along with it - and to adapt
> them to one particular flavor of entity or another, as needed, so that
> rather than having to remember the distinction between:

Yes. That's what I took out of it. You packaged a data structure 
together with the ways to access it and operations that could be 
performed on it.

You can do that in straight C using one file per object and the static 
keyword.

All that C++ gives you is a syntactical way to describe what you are doing.

And frankly I find the syntax utterly confusing


-- 
If I had all the money I've spent on drink...
...I'd spend it on drink.

Sir Henry (at Rawlinson's End)