Re: OOP can be simply summed up as 'passing messages to objects'
- From: "topmind" <topmind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 28 Feb 2006 13:27:08 -0800
This is more or less the "objects model real world objects" definition
of "object".
Not at all. Note that I said 'problem space', not 'real world'. Your
characterization only applies if one takes the myopic view that the
"real world" is only where the customer lives. However, computing
environments, mathematics, and a host of other problem spaces also
constitute conceptual worlds that are quite real. A typical application
will abstract from several problem spaces and one cannot even do OOD/P
without abstracting various computing problem spaces, which are quite
different than the customer's "real world".
Okay, but the issues and problems are still basically the same
regardless of whether scope is narrowed. Users don't think in terms of
methods either for the most part (although everybody is different and a
Plato-ist may indeed think that way).
Another issue is different perspectives on the same info. The
accounting department's view of a particular item will differ than
marketing's or production's. Thus, the system must have some amount of
relativity techniques.
-T-
H. S. Lahman
.
- References:
- Re: OOP can be simply summed up as 'passing messages to objects'
- From: Daniel T.
- Re: OOP can be simply summed up as 'passing messages to objects'
- From: H. S. Lahman
- Re: OOP can be simply summed up as 'passing messages to objects'
- From: topmind
- Re: OOP can be simply summed up as 'passing messages to objects'
- From: H. S. Lahman
- Re: OOP can be simply summed up as 'passing messages to objects'
- Prev by Date: Re: Time outs and state machines
- Previous by thread: Re: OOP can be simply summed up as 'passing messages to objects'
- Next by thread: Re: OOP can be simply summed up as 'passing messages to objects'
- Index(es):