> I've always felt that object-oriented programming as a concept (that is, define structures and then define functions to operate on them together) is useful: o

> I've always felt that object-oriented programming as a concept (that is, define structures and then define functions to operate on them together) is useful: object-oriented programming as a language design is not. What you describe here are abstract data types. Unless it involves inheritance and/or dynamic binding I wouldn't call it object-oriented programming.