Xref: utzoo comp.lang.c++:1662 comp.lang.smalltalk:694 Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!killer!ames!ll-xn!mit-eddie!uw-beaver!cornell!batcomputer!itsgw!steinmetz!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!mhyman From: mhyman@cup.portal.com Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk Subject: Re: OO debuggers Message-ID: <9363@cup.portal.com> Date: 22 Sep 88 16:02:37 GMT References: <3967@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM> Organization: The Portal System (TM) Lines: 15 XPortal-User-Id: 1.1001.2549 In article <3967@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM> jans@tekgvs.GVS.TEK.COM (Jan Steinman) says: >.... Smalltalk excels at the "make it work, then make it >fast" model of development, whereas it appears to me that C++ is heading in the >direction of more up-front design work, and less in the direction of promoting >evolutionary development. What am I missing? I can use both languages in either mode. I am able to prototype quicker in Smalltalk but that does not stop me from prototyping in C++. I also believe in "Growing a program" (See No Silver Bullet by Fred Brooks, printed in several journals). Using C++, or C, or any other compiled language just means more compilations. Marco S. Hyman mhyman@cup.portal.com ...!sun!portal!cup.portal.com!mhyman