CompuServe Messages

>As far as I am concerned, OO makes programs slower, bigger, more buggy, … >than plain good (not too structured) programming. I find this kind of statement w/o any basis. I want to hope I'm misinterpreting it, but your statement seems clear cut and in context. Surely there are OO scenario's/designs/languages/etc that can bring this about, sometimes, but surely this can be this case in non-OO scenario's too. This tends to reduce down to a common argument about whether C++ is slower, larger, more complex (you didn't say this), more buggy, uglier (you didn't say this), etc than C. Although I find this kind of thing with a concrete answer, I find it terribly misguided. To me, I'm given a problem to solve. If OO fits the bill, then it does. I know my real world, my goals and needs, staff considerations and training, short and long term issues, re-use considerations, etc, and will decide from there. Moreso, please note that there is seperation from design and implementation (though the cross-over can become real, it is still distinct). Re "plain good (not too structured) programming": what is that? Surely a roundabout (hacking??) approach is generally not optimal for most real code. Or did you mean something else?