Hal:

Too bad really--makes for a boring discussion...

Warmest regards,
John

"Hal Rosser" wrote in message
...
I'm glad you finally see it all my way.
:-)

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
There is no Object Orientated Assembly Language (by definition)--it is
the
way you write the assembly code which will either make it OOP
specification
compliant, or not--I was lucky, I naturally wrote code that way, when it
made/makes sense... from the start I seen myself showing up with a
briefcase
full of cdroms, all containing code from past projects, and written with
procedure/function calls, containing data which was appropriate for each,
using NO global data (well, sometimes ya gotta), appropriate use of
dynamic
and static .dll calls, so as to be sane, etc, etc... and constructing
whole,
new programs from what has already been built with highly structured
code...

This is all OOP is--however, the "Pseudo-Intellectuals" immediately start
banding about such terms, and do not understand that these terms are
based
on very simple principals--and that one does NOT need an "Object
Orientated
Language" to create such code--and yes, except for all data having to be
global in the past, in Perl, you could have always written OOP in Perl if
you had chosen (for the most part, that has all changed, now you can keep
data and variables local)--sometimes, I still choose not to...

Java is a scripting language which can be "compiled", it is not a good
language--it is popular with scriptkiddies (black hats) which think "C
code"
is difficult for others to understand--it is "C Syntax" and I am writing
my
memoirs in "C" !!!! grin

In the industry we watch out for people showing up and using "OOP" as
they
would George Bushes' name, or as a holy mantra--it shows they are either
fresh out of college, or "Weekend Programmers", or worse,
scriptkiddies...

Warmest regards,
John

"Hal Rosser" wrote in message
.. .
Perl is good at what its designed for - text manipulation and report
generation.
And as they say - its also known as the Swiss-Army Chain Saw of
languages.

To answer the question how is Java and the OO-languages better than
Cobol
and the procedural languages.
You'll have to get into the Object-oriented way of thinking
(and it was not an easy paradigm shift for me)
Java 'grows on you' (some say 'like a mold')
at first its ok, because the syntax is easy enough.
Then you get into inheritance and Polymorphism and the other OO
concepts
its a different way of thinking about programming.

google "Thinking in Java" or "Thinking in C++" by Bruce Eckel for a
little
more insight into the OO-way.



"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Hal:

LOL! Years ago I can remember looking at perl and asking, "WHAT THE
H3LL
IS
THAT?"--now it looks like my grocery list, simple--but I get your
point...

However, how is java or "C++" any better, after cobol, basic and
pascal--then seeing Dennis Richies' little project (A, B and "C"), I
asked,
"WHAT THE H3LL IS THAT?" grin

... however, point well taken...
Mr. Dennis Richies REAL homepage:
http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/dmr/

Warmest regards,
John