| Re: Object Programming in IDL [message #30885 is a reply to message #30832] |
Thu, 23 May 2002 08:47   |
Pavel A. Romashkin
Messages: 531
Registered: November 2000
|
Senior Member |
|
|
I think by now only a few people equate objects with object graphics.
This topic was brought up way too many times for that.
I think objects in IDL are very useful. They speed up development, help
write reuseable code and make it easy to maintain. They may not be
perfect but again - if anyone knows of any tool, be it programming
language, a car or anything else - let us all know so we can all switch.
I think I will stay with IDL over C++ for data processing applications,
despite the lack of operator overloading in IDL.
Cheers,
Pavel
Graham Wilson wrote:
>
> Just to appease Craig, I have started a new thread so I can avoid putting my
> comments after David's 'gosh golly' post ;) I am interested in hearing
> others comments...
>
> The first point that we should all be very clear on is that IDL is _NOT_
> a particularly good example of an object oriented language. You can
> certainly emulate OOP concepts using IDL's objects and a select few
> functions/proceedures but if often defeats the purpose of the OOP style.
> When someone mentions IDL objects, it is universally assumed that they
> really mean 'object graphics' which leads directly to point number 2;
> Object oriented programming != object graphics. Unfortunately, it
> is very difficult to dispel this myth using IDL because of point number 1.
>
> With regard to writing object oriented code in IDL we are all rather stuck
> until RSI implements a more complete feature set. I generally define
> polymorphism it as the ability to process objects differently depending on
> their data type or class. In this respect, the lack of operator overloading
> is an example where IDL fails to offer the full OOP tool set. Yes, you can
> overload methods, but operators should be no different. To compensate for
> this missing functionality one can write functions and/or procedures but
> this better described as an overlay and you must rely on a naming
> convention or a path precidence to avoid conflicts. Personally, I'd like
> to see true polymorphism (with overloading) and public/private methods
> sooner rather than later (is anyone at RSI listening?).
>
> A good technical book describing the merits of using objects in data
> analysis is "Programming with Data: A Guide to the S Language"
> (ISBN: 0-387-98503-4). The concepts described are specific to S-Plus but
> can be adapted to any OOP language. While they may seem abstract at first,
> they are very powerful way of manipulating and modelling data. A free
> alternative to S-Plus is R (www.r-project.com).
>
> For what it is worth, Matlab has a slightly more complete implementation of
> OOP. The one glaring (and annoying) feature missing from Matlab, however,
> is the absence of pointers and therefore dynamic structures/sizing. This,
> of course, is a grip for a different newsgroup...
>
> I lurk therefore I am.
> Graham
|
|
|
|
comp.lang.idl-pvwave archive
Members
Search
Help
Login
Home
