Re: Objective-C (Possibly OT)
Re: Objective-C (Possibly OT)
- Subject: Re: Objective-C (Possibly OT)
- From: Greg Titus <email@hidden>
- Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2002 13:23:37 -0800
On Monday, January 14, 2002, at 02:14 , Steve Klingsporn wrote:
I'm not saying Objective-C isn't a superior language to C++;
I'm sure it is, and have read over "Learning Cocoa" and played
with some of the examples and what-not... Doesn't matter if the
skill is not a portable or relevant one, though.
I'm going to avoid the whole language war issue, but I must comment on
this part.
IMHO, breadth of experience and having multiple ways to look at a
problem is _the_ main differenciator between a good programmer and a
merely average one.
I don't care whether you'll ever have a job writing in Lisp - you ought
to learn the language and play with it for awhile. It's a very different
way of thinking about programming, and when you come upon a problem in
your work where that is the best approach, you'll know it, and you'll be
able to frame and solve the problem in the optimum way -- even if you
need to take a Lisp-ish approach in C++.
Ditto Prolog. Ditto Smalltalk. Objective-C is an interesting language
_because_ it is a demonstration of "thinking in Smalltalk" but writing
in (mostly) C. Understanding the choices that Objective-C made and
common patterns of Obj-C will improve your C++ coding, I guarantee it.
Thus I would argue that there is no such thing as a non-portable or
irrelevant language skill. The ideas are portable to anywhere.
--Greg