Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
Some anti - oo here: http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/oopbad.htm Justin Treher wrote: I was browsing around some old OO ColdFusion posts and saw a lot of talk by “Tom MInderson”. It seems like he has about 50 posts spread out (by doing a quick Google search). They all pretty much say the same thing: OO complicates things for datacentric applications that ColdFusion is targeting. I.e. we don’t control cars or automatic garage doors. Then he goes on about this “Set Theory”. The only thing I could find on set theory with Coldfusion was at http://cfdj.sys-con.com/read/41826_p.htm … the most complex ColdFusion article ever. Is anyone familiar with his anti-web app OOP mission? Do his arguments have any validity? What the heck is set theory programming? I felt like I was stepping back into philosophy 101 with syllogisms. I do see his point that trying to map objects to a relational database is where OOP starts to feel really unnatural. In addition, with the business objects we deal with, it seems unnatural for them to have behaviors, unlike a car being able to “start()”. Justin You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
Sounds like someone who doesn't get OO and has decided that he must be right and the rest of the programming world is wrong. On 8/29/07, Justin Treher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do see his point that trying to map objects to a relational database is where OOP starts to feel really unnatural. In addition, with the business objects we deal with, it seems unnatural for them to have behaviors, unlike a car being able to start(). Dealing with relational databases is what ORM was created for. Regarding business objects, if you have objects with no behavior you basically might as well just be using a structure. I would disagree that it is unnatural for the business objects we deal with to have behavior. If objects shouldn't have behavior, where does the actual application logic go? If you don't encapsulate the behavior with the data (in an object) then it just results is spaghetti code all over the place. shipment.determineShippingTime() inventory.adjustInventory(order) contentCache.clear() These seem perfectly natural to me. Basically, even if you don't completely understand or even agree with the idea of OOP, the rest of the world does. Failure to embrace, or at least understand, OOP in this day and age is going to translate to a difficult programming career. You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
RE: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
Yeah, I read a bit of that. I also think Minderson responded to that. He noted that it was very one sided. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Peddle Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 4:49 PM To: cfcdev@cfczone.org Subject: Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO Some anti - oo here: http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/oopbad.htm Justin Treher wrote: I was browsing around some old OO ColdFusion posts and saw a lot of talk by Tom MInderson. It seems like he has about 50 posts spread out (by doing a quick Google search). They all pretty much say the same thing: OO complicates things for datacentric applications that ColdFusion is targeting. I.e. we don't control cars or automatic garage doors. Then he goes on about this Set Theory. The only thing I could find on set theory with Coldfusion was at http://cfdj.sys-con.com/read/41826_p.htm . the most complex ColdFusion article ever. Is anyone familiar with his anti-web app OOP mission? Do his arguments have any validity? What the heck is set theory programming? I felt like I was stepping back into philosophy 101 with syllogisms. I do see his point that trying to map objects to a relational database is where OOP starts to feel really unnatural. In addition, with the business objects we deal with, it seems unnatural for them to have behaviors, unlike a car being able to start(). Justin You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.10/977 - Release Date: 8/28/2007 4:29 PM You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
Just the fact that it is hosted at geocities should give you all the information you need. ;-) On 8/29/07, Brian Peddle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Some anti - oo here: http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/oopbad.htm You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
I like OO. I don't do full OO models in CF much. Java (where I spend the most time outside of CF) is a different story - and one where I have tools such as Hibernate ;). I really just wanted to comment on this statement: In addition, with the business objects we deal with, it seems unnatural for them to have behaviors, unlike a car being able to start(). We don't have cars, but we do have documents (which might publish()), user credentials (which might expire()), trouble tickets (which might close()), etc. Building a truly OO object model is incredibly difficult, because it necessitates a sharp departure from the procedural mindset that we are all forced to deal with on the web. And when I say incredibly difficult, I don't mean just for beginners, I mean for everyone. It gets easier as you practice (like anything else), but I don't think it ever gets easy. cheers, barneyb On 8/29/07, Justin Treher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was browsing around some old OO ColdFusion posts and saw a lot of talk by Tom MInderson. It seems like he has about 50 posts spread out (by doing a quick Google search). They all pretty much say the same thing: OO complicates things for datacentric applications that ColdFusion is targeting. I.e. we don't control cars or automatic garage doors. Then he goes on about this Set Theory. The only thing I could find on set theory with Coldfusion was at http://cfdj.sys-con.com/read/41826_p.htm … the most complex ColdFusion article ever. Is anyone familiar with his anti-web app OOP mission? Do his arguments have any validity? What the heck is set theory programming? I felt like I was stepping back into philosophy 101 with syllogisms. I do see his point that trying to map objects to a relational database is where OOP starts to feel really unnatural. In addition, with the business objects we deal with, it seems unnatural for them to have behaviors, unlike a car being able to start(). Justin You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org -- Barney Boisvert [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.barneyb.com/ Got Gmail? I have 100 invites. You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
RE: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
Interesting reads, however a bit pushy on the I'm right stance. However I have to wonder... it OO really a good way to go? I'll preface by saying I've studied OO (java), though never had a chance to use it due to budget and time constraints (read: I'm inexperienced and that would drag the projects out for months on end..) So I've developed the following opinions for OO on projects: OO's fine if you: have a lot of expertise in it and write applications you host OO's fine if you: will need to use common objects (get from db, store in db, look up customer, get site details) OO's not fine if you: have a big project that needs to be on time, bug free and you don't have much experience in it OO's not fine if you: are building small custom internal applications I guess I've always been up against the fact that I'm the only developer here and have to show results and no excuses. So I've been shy on the CF OO thing because it seemed like such a monumental effort, maybe that's where these guys are comming from.. high pressure, high stress, I don't have time..Brent Nicholas - There, I guess King George will be able to read that! - John Hancock From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: cfcdev@cfczone.org Subject: RE: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:07:25 -0400 Yeah, I read a bit of that. I also think Minderson responded to that. He noted that it was very one sided. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Peddle Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 4:49 PM To: cfcdev@cfczone.org Subject: Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO Some anti - oo here: http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/oopbad.htmJustin Treher wrote: I was browsing around some old OO ColdFusion posts and saw a lot of talk by Tom MInderson. It seems like he has about 50 posts spread out (by doing a quick Google search). They all pretty much say the same thing: OO complicates things for datacentric applications that ColdFusion is targeting. I.e. we don't control cars or automatic garage doors. Then he goes on about this Set Theory. The only thing I could find on set theory with Coldfusion was at http://cfdj.sys-con.com/read/41826_p.htm . the most complex ColdFusion article ever. Is anyone familiar with his anti-web app OOP mission? Do his arguments have any validity? What the heck is set theory programming? I felt like I was stepping back into philosophy 101 with syllogisms. I do see his point that trying to map objects to a relational database is where OOP starts to feel really unnatural. In addition, with the business objects we deal with, it seems unnatural for them to have behaviors, unlike a car being able to start(). JustinYou are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.orgYou are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.10/977 - Release Date: 8/28/2007 4:29 PM You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
RE: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
hmm... well I didn't intend to send this after writing it... since after I wrote I thought.. hmm.. I'm just thinking out loud. however my mouse and hand conspired against me... So feel free to chuckle and guffaw.. :) BN Brent Nicholas - There, I guess King George will be able to read that! - John Hancock From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: [EMAIL PROTECTED]: RE: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OODate: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 15:38:24 -0600 Interesting reads, however a bit pushy on the I'm right stance. However I have to wonder... it OO really a good way to go? I'll preface by saying I've studied OO (java), though never had a chance to use it due to budget and time constraints (read: I'm inexperienced and that would drag the projects out for months on end..) So I've developed the following opinions for OO on projects: OO's fine if you: have a lot of expertise in it and write applications you hostOO's fine if you: will need to use common objects (get from db, store in db, look up customer, get site details) OO's not fine if you: have a big project that needs to be on time, bug free and you don't have much experience in itOO's not fine if you: are building small custom internal applications I guess I've always been up against the fact that I'm the only developer here and have to show results and no excuses. So I've been shy on the CF OO thing because it seemed like such a monumental effort, maybe that's where these guys are comming from.. high pressure, high stress, I don't have time..Brent Nicholas - There, I guess King George will be able to read that! - John Hancock From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: cfcdev@cfczone.org Subject: RE: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:07:25 -0400 Yeah, I read a bit of that. I also think Minderson responded to that. He noted that it was very one sided. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Peddle Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2007 4:49 PM To: cfcdev@cfczone.org Subject: Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO Some anti - oo here: http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/oopbad.htmJustin Treher wrote: I was browsing around some old OO ColdFusion posts and saw a lot of talk by Tom MInderson. It seems like he has about 50 posts spread out (by doing a quick Google search). They all pretty much say the same thing: OO complicates things for datacentric applications that ColdFusion is targeting. I.e. we don't control cars or automatic garage doors. Then he goes on about this Set Theory. The only thing I could find on set theory with Coldfusion was at http://cfdj.sys-con.com/read/41826_p.htm . the most complex ColdFusion article ever. Is anyone familiar with his anti-web app OOP mission? Do his arguments have any validity? What the heck is set theory programming? I felt like I was stepping back into philosophy 101 with syllogisms. I do see his point that trying to map objects to a relational database is where OOP starts to feel really unnatural. In addition, with the business objects we deal with, it seems unnatural for them to have behaviors, unlike a car being able to start(). JustinYou are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.orgYou are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org-- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.484 / Virus Database: 269.12.10/977 - Release Date: 8/28/2007 4:29 PM You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfmCFCDev is supported by:Katapult Media, Inc.We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock!www.katapultmedia.comAn archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock
Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
On 8/29/07, Brent Nicholas [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OO's fine if you: have a lot of expertise in it and write applications you host Not sure what hosting has to do with it. OO's fine if you: will need to use common objects (get from db, store in db, look up customer, get site details) Isn't this true of all apps? OO's not fine if you: have a big project that needs to be on time, bug free and you don't have much experience in it Agree with you on the last point. Absent the last point however, big projects tend to be more bug-free in OO (in my experience), which leads to better quality software and easier-to-reach deadlines. If you're experienced in OO and avail yourself of the tools available, it doesn't take any more time to write OO applications than non-OO applications. Once you get into maintenance and changes is where you'll be kicking yourself if you don't have a well-architected OO application. OO's not fine if you: are building small custom internal applications This is a pretty ridiculous generalization in my opinion. Small custom internal applications tend to be the ones that grow into large custom internal applications. If you start with a bad foundation you'll again be kicking yourself as people want features added to it. Development is not a race to the finish line. Development is about building maintainable applications that don't have to be thrown out when people want changes made to them. I guess I've always been up against the fact that I'm the only developer here and have to show results and no excuses. So I've been shy on the CF OO thing because it seemed like such a monumental effort, maybe that's where these guys are comming from.. high pressure, high stress, I don't have time.. If you're in an environment where your boss doesn't give you the time and doesn't encourage you to keep improving your skills, not to mention give you the freedom to do so, I'd say find another job. ;-) Obviously deadlines are important, and as you go through the learning curve associated with OO, you may need to do things how you already know how to do them in order to hit a deadline. If that becomes a constant excuse for why people don't learn new things, then I take issue with that. The world of development is OO. CF developers need to realize this and get on board. After all, 50 million Elvis fans can't be wrong. ;-) -- Matt Woodward [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.mattwoodward.com You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
Smarter minds used to say 540K ought to be enough for everybody, and even they got away with it. On Wed, 29 Aug 2007, Brian Kotek wrote: Sounds like someone who doesn't get OO and has decided that he must be right and the rest of the programming world is wrong. On 8/29/07, Justin Treher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do see his point that trying to map objects to a relational database is where OOP starts to feel really unnatural. In addition, with the business objects we deal with, it seems unnatural for them to have behaviors, unlike a car being able to start(). Dealing with relational databases is what ORM was created for. Regarding business objects, if you have objects with no behavior you basically might as well just be using a structure. I would disagree that it is unnatural for the business objects we deal with to have behavior. If objects shouldn't have behavior, where does the actual application logic go? If you don't encapsulate the behavior with the data (in an object) then it just results is spaghetti code all over the place. shipment.determineShippingTime() inventory.adjustInventory(order) contentCache.clear() These seem perfectly natural to me. Basically, even if you don't completely understand or even agree with the idea of OOP, the rest of the world does. Failure to embrace, or at least understand, OOP in this day and age is going to translate to a difficult programming career. You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
? On 8/29/07, Stijn Dreezen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Smarter minds used to say 540K ought to be enough for everybody, and even they got away with it. You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
I think the missing word is memory as in RAM on a motherboard. Brian Kotek said the following on 8/29/2007 8:05 PM: ? On 8/29/07, *Stijn Dreezen* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Smarter minds used to say 540K ought to be enough for everybody, and even they got away with it. You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
First, I think it's significant that these are old posts. Second, I see this sort of thing alot where people seem to think that there is only one true answer to a problem and proceed to ferociously defend that solution as if there were no other possible solution as cool as the one they are behind. Perhaps the most popular example of this in current times is some debate in the media about which alternate energy source is really the best one. Solar is better than wind is better than E85 is better than Hydro is Better than nuke - etc... It's also seen in the monthly debates on CFTalk about PHP is better than ASP is better then .NET is better then CF - etc... In reality, it's more like the right solution for the right problem. Usually it's actually a combination of solutions that do the job. This case if no different. In fact, look inside any single method in a OO design and what to you typically find? Chunks of procedural code calling other OO methods. I think it's dangerous to call out any single technology or technique as if the others are all hogwash. Hogwash indeed. -Cameron PS: No hogs were harmed during the writing of this email. On 8/29/07, Justin Treher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I was browsing around some old OO ColdFusion posts and saw a lot of talk by Tom MInderson. It seems like he has about 50 posts spread out (by doing a quick Google search). They all pretty much say the same thing: -- Cameron Childress Sumo Consulting Inc http://www.sumoc.com --- cell: 678.637.5072 aim: cameroncf email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
Re: [CFCDEV] Tom Minderson and anti-OO
On 8/29/07, Cameron Childress [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: PS: No hogs were harmed during the writing of this email. But were any cleaned? I hear they don't much like that. :) -- If God didn't want smoke in the air, he wouldn't have told us to burn witches. Stephen Colbert Now blogging http://www.blivit.org/blog/index.cfm http://www.blivit.org/mr_urc/index.cfm You are subscribed to cfcdev. To unsubscribe, please follow the instructions at http://www.cfczone.org/listserv.cfm CFCDev is supported by: Katapult Media, Inc. We are cool code geeks looking for fun projects to rock! www.katapultmedia.com An archive of the CFCDev list is available at www.mail-archive.com/cfcdev@cfczone.org
