Damn!
You are right. There are many things that are suspiciously close to my web-page. For example, I can see three of them together in one spot:
Countless academics point to OOP as the reason C++ is superior to C, neglecting to mention that C itself was an inherently painful language to use and that any abstraction would've been an improvement. C++ too is a difficult language to use; it's just not as difficult as C. That's pretty faint praise.
Efficiency is the stated goal of C-style languages and OOP, but the result is too often the opposite:
* Programming has become bloated\ufffdten lines of code are now needed where one used to suffice.
* Wrapping and mapping often use up programmer and execution time as OOP code struggles with various data stores.
Complaints about using C to paint a bad picture of all of non-OO, "wrapping and mapping" being actual words I used, and the 10-to-1 bloat claim is an actual code sample right on my page. (I admitted there it was an exaggeration meant to illustrate a pattern.)
I don't know whether to be flattered to insulted by the likely copying. A citation would have been more polite.
