Re: How to motivate use of OO?

Robert Martin wrote:
On 2006-07-07 16:07:53 -0500, "topmind" <topmind@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> said:

Well, it is a technique that is waaaaaaay oversold. It has duped
Dilbertian bosses the world over. And even many OO affectionado's will
admit that too many newbies abuse it and go hog-wild with class
hierarchies. Plus, if we load up our toolbox with every marginally good
idea, we would have 10 paradigms in there such that nobody can read our
code. It may be good job security for the purpretrator, but not very
economical.

On the other hand, it seems that your position is that though the tool
can be useful, nobody should use it because it has been abused, and
because too many tools leads to confusion. I think that's a silly
position.

Then why not include ess-expressions and functional and logical in an
application also if we go that route? I don't think it is economical to
pile on the paradigms and techniques if each adds only marginal
improvement. From the stock-holder's perspective they would rather pay
something who knows just 2 paradigms than somebody who knows 8 unless
the 8-er can demonstrate they are worth the extra bucks. At best the OO
improvements mount to only something like 2% and maybe 5% on a good
day.

Consultants and mentors like Paradigm Potpourri because they get paid
more. But that does not mean it is economical. Is it possible you are
biased toward such because of your position? I am just asking, not
accusing. Being in a position for a long time sometimes makes one lose
perspective of other points of view, such as the owner's.

Paradigm Potpourri complicates staffing.

--
Robert C. Martin (Uncle Bob) | email: unclebob@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

-T-

.