Re: What's OOP?
- From: "wolfgang kern" <nowhere@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 25 Apr 2005 20:34:24 +0200
<randyhyde@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
| > most readers here know me as the very last HEX-coder anyway,
| > so don't wonder my question: what's all about this OOP-stuff?
| OOP, in it's rawest form, works under the assumption that each packet
| of data (i.e., an "object") carries around not only the data, but the
| list of operations (i.e., procedures/functions) that are possible on
| that data.
| > As far I understood it's nothing else than data/code-grouping,
| > and where is the difference to my way of seeing this?
| In a very low-level sense, you are correct. Objects have a lot to do
| with the data and code grouping. In particular, each data object
| "carries" around the code that operates on it. Okay, not really, it
| does, however, carry around *pointers* to the code that can operate on
| it.
[..]
| > So do I use OOP without even recognised it ? :)
| No. Now if your data values carried around pointers to the routines
| that operate on those data values, you could *start* to make a claim
| that you're doing OOP.
[..]
Thanks, I actually use things like this in my 'application-string-
interpreter', where user defined variables can have any format, including:
colour, location, input limit ranges, output form, array index etc..,
as tokens in any order. But this is a BASIC-like HLL-interpreter.
For pure ASM (talk to CPU) I know only a few possible datatypes,
exactly the types the CPU knows, and here I can't see any sense in OOP.
__
wolfgang
.
- References:
- What's OOP?
- From: wolfgang kern
- Re: What's OOP?
- From: randyhyde
- What's OOP?
- Prev by Date: Re: What's OOP?
- Next by Date: Re: An Object-Oriented Syntax for x86 Assembly
- Previous by thread: Re: What's OOP?
- Next by thread: Re: What's OOP?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|