In article <3d7d6b10$1@10.1.10.29>,
"Tom Shelton" <tom@mtogden.com> writes:

[...]

> I am still convinced that OOP provides a much better framework
> for handeling complexity and code reuse. My feelings on the
> matter haven't changed.


But you have started to realize that those feelings are not nearly
as rational or objective as you had previously thought. That they are
much more a matter of what you HADN'T examined than you previously
suspected. You might even start becoming even more curious about
which other unexamined assumptions are contributing to those feelings,
and how you can examine them.

> It seems to me that all the means to encapsulation you have
> demonstrated exist as a natural part of most OO langauges.


"Exist" is one thing. Used, in preference to the less safe but more
popular buzzword approaches, is another thing entirely.

--

W.E. (Bill) Goodrich, PhD

*-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*
* CHANGE YOUR SEXUALITY * http://www.nyx.net/~bgoodric/ctg.html *
* * *
* Without Aversive * ctgcentral@earthlink.net *
* Behavior Modification * Creative Technology Group *
* or Drugs * PO Box 286 *
* * Englewood, CO 80151-0286 *
*-----------------------*--------------------------------------------*