Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.advocacy
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uupsi!sugar!peter
From: peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva)
Subject: Re: NeXT Press Release
Message-ID: <1991May9.172353.2545@sugar.hackercorp.com>
Organization: Sugar Land Unix -- Houston, TX
References: <b5bG3um&1@cs.psu.edu> <1991May8.173528.361@sugar.hackercorp.com> <w?aGagh#1@cs.psu.edu>
Date: Thu, 9 May 1991 17:23:53 GMT

In article <w?aGagh#1@cs.psu.edu> melling@cs.psu.edu (Michael D Mellinger) writes:
> In article <1991May8.173528.361@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
> You said something about using preprocessors languages,

The language design is a front-end to C along with a runtime library. How
it's implemented can't change that. Neither language is what one would call
a good fundamental OO language. They're both about as good as can be given
the constraints, but it's certainly not worth arguing the merits of one over
the other.
-- 
Peter da Silva.   `-_-'
<peter@sugar.hackercorp.com>.
