topmind at technologist.com
Sun Mar 4 02:10:28 CET 2001
> I notice comp.lang.java has been missing from your incessant tirades.
> How about this: OO has widespread market acceptance.
> You want metrics? Look here: http://www.monster.com.
I don't dispute it's popularity, at least as a buzzword
(actual decent usage of OO is even disputed by many
> Understanding OO is a good career move; science is irrelevant. I doubt that
> anyone can "prove" anything about this industry that doesn't have a dollar
> sign associated with it. Most OO people I know do it because they can make a
> good living at it and they find it intellectually satisfying.
> Please take your discussion to comp.table.programming (I hear it's the next
> big thing).
You never know. Merit and proof is not even a prerequisite.
> Maybe if you identify yourself you'll be taken more seriously. Better yet,
> go soak your head.
It hurts one career to admit distaste for OO. I have a family to
take care of. Where does Salmon Rushdie hang out, btw?
> I apologize to all affected for responding to an anonymous troll.
> "Topmind" <topmind at technologist.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.15085517debf4b649896ca at news.earthlink.net...
> > >
> > >I've often noticed that demanding metrics is the last
> > >line of defense of the conservatives in our field against
> > >innovation
> > So science be damned? At least it is official now.
> > I am *not* against innovation. I am against the overhyping
> > of fads without proof.
More information about the Python-list