|
|
Posted by Tony Marston on 11/12/23 11:51
"Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
news:8sCdnSW4dsbo_D_ZnZ2dnUVZ_qSdnZ2d@comcast.com...
> Tony Marston wrote:
>> "Jerry Stuckle" <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote in message
>> news:WJSdnXcda45lUTzZnZ2dnUVZ_oKdnZ2d@comcast.com...
>>
<snip>
>>
>> That still does not disguise the fact that what you are calling a
>> fundamental principle of OO is not unique to OO at all, but something
>> which has been a part of every other language for decades. The fact that
>> it is required instead of optional is a trivial point which most
>> intelligent people would not even consider.
>>
>
> It makes a huge difference.
When most people are already aware of the fact every language already has a
built-in messaging feature, they do not consider the fact that in OO it is
mandatory instead of optional a point worth considering. So to give it
elevated status and call it a fundamental principle of OO is just OTT. The
fundamental principles of OOP, what sets it apart from other paradigms, is
encapsulation, inheritance and polymorhism. Every paradigm has message
passing, so it cannot be a fundamental principle of any of them. It is a
*standard* feature, not a *differentiating* feature.
> You wouldn't get by with your sloppy practices on a large project. You
> would have to follow good OO principles to get the job done.
The people on that failed project were following "good OO principles" which
is why the project failed. I ignored their failed ideas and consequently was
able to produce working software in 2 man-weeks instead of their 3
man-years. So you can take your "good OO principles" and stick them where
the sun doesn't shine.
> Quite frankly, Tony, I've seen guys like you on big projects. And they
> don't make it. They just can't understand why their practices are a bunch
> of crap.
And I've seen guys like you on big projects who have a knack of turning OOP
into POO(H).
> And I wonder about what Booch (the creator of OO theory) would say about
> your "trivial point" - which he considers a fundamental concept in OO. I
> think he knows a *little* more about it than you do!
And a *lot* more than you do.
> Moron.
Right back at ya.
--
Tony Marston
http://www.tonymarston.net
http://www.radicore.org
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|