| Re: When should objects be used? [message #16084 is a reply to message #15965] |
Tue, 29 June 1999 00:00   |
J.D. Smith
Messages: 214
Registered: August 1996
|
Senior Member |
|
|
David Fanning wrote:
>
> Richard G. French (rfrench@wellesley.edu) writes:
>
>> My problem is that so much of the discussion of objects
>> seems abstract that I have a hard time figuring out how to
>> translate it to the problems I am trying to solve.
>
> To tell you the truth, I read JD's articles five or six
> times and I'm *still* not sure I have a clue. :-(
>
> Cheers,
>
> David
>
> P.S. Let's just say that object programming is a whole
> lot easier than a lot of people might lead you to believe. :-)
>
Now David, I cannot sit idly by while you indict me on charges of
misleading the uninitiated populace ;). The framework I outlined really
isn't specific to object-oriented programming, it's just most easily
expressed as such. And it sounds complicated, not because it is, but
because I haven't worked on it enough.
So my advice is: use whatever style of programming produces a program
you can explain in 1 paragraph. Object oriented programming *is* easy.
Especially in IDL. 10 minutes will suffice to learn the mechanics of
it. However, in the great space of designs, that region labelled
Obect-Oriented contains vastly more bad designs than good ones, compared
to the more familiar regions.
Yes, OO is easy. Sometimes even easier than linear design. If you have
modest goals of reuseability and interchange, it's not very different
from other design styles. It can produce enticingly elegant solutions,
or can lead you far astray of your original goals. So, by all means,
give it a try. You'll like it. Just be somewhat cautious before
throwing all you eggs in that basket.
JD
--
J.D. Smith |*| WORK: (607) 255-5842
Cornell University Dept. of Astronomy |*| (607) 255-6263
304 Space Sciences Bldg. |*| FAX: (607) 255-5875
Ithaca, NY 14853 |*|
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
