On Oct 12, 2006, at 10:18 AM, Richard Lynch wrote:
I can't architect a good OOP solution to a problem that hasn't been fully defined, any more than one can architect a house without knowing all the rooms that are needed...
Sorry to jump into the middle of the conversation, but I thought this was a pretty interesting comment. It serves as one of those occasional reminders that I need to go back and study OOP structure design a bit more. I know you're right about the importance of a fully defined problem, but it also seems that the reverse is true if you're really good with OOP. In other words, it seems like any high quality solution starts by defining least common denominators. You start with basic building blocks and expand from there; I'm always amazed when I see space stations or other complex structures built out of Legos, for example. My problem is that I usually look at OOP and think it'll take too long, so I go the non-OOP route, solve the problem, and move on. I can't help but think I'm missing out. I do have libraries of code that I reuse, but I've always heard that I'd benefit a lot more from them if I OOPed them. Dunno... that's my two cents worth anyway hehe
-- PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/) To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
