Re: Is Procedural Paradigm a basis of OO Paradigm?


S Perryman wrote:
topmind wrote:

On Mar 30, 5:41 am, "Leslie Sanford" <jabberdab...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

<adawo...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I don't know why he bothers to frequent this forum since
he makes no useful contribution to it. Rather, he takes
up a lot of bandwidth that could be better spent, by all
of us, discussing solutions to problems. Topmind is
not a problem worth dealing with and I am done with
him.

I was curious about the activity on comp.object a few days ago, so I
looked up the group's statistics on google:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.object/about?hl=en

The aforementioned poster is listed as comp.object's all time poster.

I make no comment on this other than I think that it is... interesting.

It is my use of non-OO technologies that allow me to be so
productive :-)

No, more supporting evidence IMHO of the mental problems that I have often
claimed you seem to be afflicted with (delusion etc). Another quick
analysis of the stats has your infestation of comp.object around the
2000 time-frame.

Given that Robert Martin has been posting on comp.object since the
early 1990s, you have managed to post as much as he has over 15+ yrs
in half the time. Yet I have yet to see anything from you (has anyone ?? )
that can even vaguely be deemed to be beneficial to comp.object as
intended by its Usenet charter.

Debunking OO fanatics is my hobby. Some bowl, some keep gardens, some
sail boats, and some of us debunk OO.

As far as "beneficial", you only consider preaching from fellow OO
zealots "beneficial". In that sense, I could never pass your test. I
am like an evolutionist in a creationist forum.

You have no objective evidence that OOP is better. Until you get some,
I will defend non-OO technologies when I see them being trashed.

You attack me personally BECAUSE you have no evidence.

Bashing people is for those without evidence.
Bashing people is for those without evidence.
Bashing people is for those without evidence.
Bashing people is for those without evidence.




Regards,
Steven Perryman

-T-
oop.ismad.com

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OO Methodolgy Perspective
    ... S Perryman wrote: ... and read written documents to avoid data entry screens. ... a human to do the whole process instead of automate it). ... You have never provided a "full body of evidence" of anything regarding ...
    (comp.object)
  • Re: "Humans Do It Now" Criteria (was: Definition Challenge)
    ... I am only debunking the claim that no form of ID is testable. ... This must be the Bryce Jacob's definition of "debunk", ... There is no evidence for the existence of ET either. ... provide empirical evidence in support of your speculations. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: No 757 Hit the Pentagon Re: Four More Years of Murder
    ... Besides, half the debunking is ... > Simple fact is, two planes hit the WTC, a plane failed to make its ... > the evidence that has been posted has been questionable to say the ... And what evidence convinced you a 757 hit the Pentagon? ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Fantasy fans...
    ... The debunking page ... self publishing a novel *never* worked. ... supposed debunking of the page in defense of self-publishing by a page ... evidence of hype. ...
    (rec.arts.sf.composition)
  • Re: busting a myth
    ... The debunking of his false belief that he falsely believes is ... despite any and all evidence to the ... interstate highway system for decades. ... Prev by Date: ...
    (misc.transport.trucking)