> > > * Java is a small language (not necessarily an advantage, but certainly a difference) > > > * Java is "pure" OO. This is probably the biggest technical advantage of Java > > > over Ada. A hybrid language like Ada95 or C++ tends to be the worst of two worlds. > > Where is it written that "pure OO" is a necessary or even > desirable goal? I believe in mixing the gene pool. In a recent interview in IEEE Software (or was it Computer?), Barne Stroustrup cited as an advantage the fact that C++ supports multiple programming paradigms. I agree with him. The argument that "pure OO" is better is a vestige of our unbridled enthusiam for all things object-oriented in the 80's. Arguments like this are just religion - what I call the Argument By Appeal to Higher Authority. What these people forget is that systems (both natural and artificial) are constructed using a variety of techniques. Nature doesn't care about purity, only dogmatic programming language designers do. Mother Nature, and organizations that fund development of software systems, only care about what works.