[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] Date Index Thread Index Search archive:
Date:Mon Jun 29 18:51:48 1993 
Subject:Re: Opposed views on the nature of OOP diagnosed 
From:David LaGrone 
Volume-ID:930629.06 

In article <C9Cxpn.7n7@cs.bham.ac.uk> A.Sloman@cs.bham.ac.uk (Aaron Sloman) writes:

>And you don't need an OOP language to give you support for
>abstraction. It's a requirement for *any* well structured language
>providing user-defined datatypes. (E.g. ML ?)

THANKS, Aaron!
  I finally saw the light after my last message.  <grin>  You are right!
  And I understand why you are right.  And I agree with you...now that I
  understand.

  Thanks, again, for your willingness to explain this to me in detail.

				...David



================================================================================
David LaGrone               | All comments, opinions and inquiries are my own.
Texas Instruments           | They are NOT to be attributed to Texas Instru-
P. O. Box 650311 M/S 3928   | ments, Inc., or any other employees or agents.
Dallas, Texas 75065-0311    |
(214) 917-1908 fax 917-7519 | Does this satisfactorily exclude everyone but me?
----------------------------+
lagrone@flopn2.dseg.ti.com  |
================================================================================