Revision 1655084 of "Talk:Dispute over the definition of object-oriented programming" on enwikiSo, what is the dispute exactly? [[User:(|(]] 09:18, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC) : I have no idea. Object-oriented programming is well defined. [[User:Dysprosia|Dysprosia]] 09:23, 25 Oct 2003 (UTC) ::It's Taku versus everyone. The debate stretches over many pages: ::*[[Talk:Window class]] ::*[[Talk:Object-oriented programming]] ::*[[Talk:Class (object-oriented programming)]] ::*[[Talk:Inheritance (object-oriented programming)]] ::*Various user talk pages ::*Here ::And it's been going on for months. A slow-burning forest fire. -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 00:01, Oct 31, 2003 (UTC) :::You forgot [[VfD]], [[Wikipedia:List of controversial issues|List of controversial issues]] and [[Wikipedia:Current disputes over articles|Current disputes over articles]]. Maybe other places too. :( [[User:Angela|Angela]] I have to say that you need to study OOP if you want what are dispute we have. -- [[User:TakuyaMurata|Taku]] 00:28, Oct 31, 2003 (UTC) :Sorry? Say that again? -- [[User:Tim Starling|Tim Starling]] 00:33, Oct 31, 2003 (UTC) ::I tried and failed to come up with an complete parse, but I think he's saying that he understands OOP and you don't. I'm half-inclined to start doing some mass-reversion, since the message is simply not getting through and it would be easier to start over than to try to fix the articles he's mangled. [[User:Stan Shebs|Stan]] 02:50, 31 Oct 2003 (UTC) All content in the above text box is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike license Version 4 and was originally sourced from https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1655084.
![]() ![]() This site is not affiliated with or endorsed in any way by the Wikimedia Foundation or any of its affiliates. In fact, we fucking despise them.
|