But it had the advantage that the book I was looking in used it, and it is simple to understand.

Said book used it because however suboptimal it was, there was a bunch of research that used it.

However some of that research might not have meant quite what it seems on the surface. For instance with a lot of small routines they may get changed more per line in maintainance. But if they implement more functionality per line of code (eg because of less duplication of code), then the lines of code measure is less meaningful.

Cheers,
Ben

PS OK, I admit it. It had the benefit of being easy to extend in a way that got me the conclusion I intuitively feel is right (that shortness matters more in good OO than procedural).