In reply to Steven: - Firstly, Wikipedia isn't a great source to quote. :-D - Secondly, OOP as a style has basic stuff, and it has advanced stuff. I'm not saying teach inheritance and polymorphism on day 1, I'm saying teach that objects have properties (and then objects have methods). Not necessarily because it's _better_ than procedural (we could argue that forever) but because _almost all day-to-day programming languages that the students will encounter will involve objects, properties and methods_.
In reply to Alan: Your first example applies equally to OOP or procedural - it's a code snippet, not a coding style. Your second example is overcomplicated - why teach getters and setters from the word go when a property (public var age:Number;) is far simpler/more obvious? Yes, getters and setters are part of the OOP paradigm, but not a requirement. Ian On 8/21/07, Alan MacDougall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > So rather than engage in an argument as to whether OOP or procedural is > "better", we're basically asking: Do the additional distractions of OOP > justify the payoff from learning it up front? If you're teaching fellow > geeks, then yes. If you're teaching people with a more casual interest > in programming, or (shudder) people who are required to take the class, > you may want to keep it script-simple. Compare: > _______________________________________________ [email protected] To change your subscription options or search the archive: http://chattyfig.figleaf.com/mailman/listinfo/flashcoders Brought to you by Fig Leaf Software Premier Authorized Adobe Consulting and Training http://www.figleaf.com http://training.figleaf.com
