On 31 Jan 2016, at 4:42pm, Keith Medcalf <kmedcalf at dessus.com> wrote:
> And I thought the "Object Oriented" jihad blew up when it was discovered to > be counter to productivity and performance in the 1990's and that it did not > provide a single one of the "advantages" claimed by its mujahedeen warriors. Hmm. I thing Object Oriented programming is amazing, and it provides the brain which a far simpler safer way to think about what it wants the program to do, thus speeding development and reducing errors. I even use OO in JavaScript and PHP, both of which languages can do the same things without using OO. It's just that an interface between procedural programming and OO has to deal with certain exceptions and rarities which OO is not good at dealing with. As a previous poster commented, one of these is error-handling. If the person who writes the library doesn't think all this out clearly ahead of time, you end up with a library where it takes four lines of programming just to tell whether the last command received an error. Or some other inelegant and tedious thing the programmer has to do, to use the library at all. It's possible to do this stuff well, but plan to throw away the first two versions, not just the first one. <http://www.ccs.neu.edu/course/cs5500f14/Notes/Prototyping1/planToThrowOneAway.html?> Simon.
