Warp wrote:
> David H. Burns <dhb### [at] cherokeetelnet> wrote:
>> *I* don't think, naturally or otherwise, like any OOP programming I have 
>> seen!! You may be trying to
>> read your on programming philosophy onto the world, or we may be of 
>> different genera. :)
> 
>   You clearly don't understand what "object-oriented programming" means.
> Then you come here to tell us that you don't want it, whatever it might be.
> 
I have seen a number of object oriented programs. And I did not like 
what I say.
They are pretty nigh incomprehensible to me. I know they were produced 
(or claimed to
be produced) by object oriented programming. Now it's true that the 
process of programming
is different from the program produced, but the product that I see gives 
little indication that
  it was produced by thought processes like mine. I don't presume to say 
that you don't naturally
think like object oriented programming, but since I have more experience 
*my*mind than you,
I can assure you that I don't! I definitely would not like to see the 
Pov-Ray scripting language
turn into something like those examples of OOP I have seen.

BTW I forgot one other possibility: You might be a genus. I once worked 
with an old fellow who
was a near genus (at least) in programming. His mind seemed to work in a 
way in almost diametrically
opposed to mine. Any time we tried to work together, we started with an 
argument but ended
accomplishing our task. He' dead now; I wonder what he would have 
thought of OOP, it might
have been his native language. :)

David

Post a reply to this message