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