On Mon, 26 Nov 2001 11:00:48 -0800, "Jonathan Allen"
<greywolf@cts.com> wrote:

>Please pick a different example, as there is nothing wrong with global
>functions. It would suck if we had to use a class every time we wanted a
>simple math function.


Isn't that what OOP purists strive for, though? How could that 'simple
math function' serve as a base class for inheriting some extra
functionality to serve the software reuse God if all it was was a
function?

MM