When it get to this abstract level, just think of objects as cells & functions as peptides carrying messages (variables) to hungry mitochondria (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrion) waiting to be fed to make those cells work for you. If you have all your code working correctly, you'll be able to Interconnect them all and you'll get a Paris Hilton - or something like that. :-)
Then take 2 Prozac, and re-boot . . . ed (works for me) On 9/30/07, John Zabroski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The benefit of object-orientation is message dispatch. Objects are peers. > They define what to do, not how to do it. Delegation of responsibilities is > therefore way more dependable a concept than simply polymorphism. If the > notion of a network of inter-cooperating agents working together to > accomplish a task resembles your task, then objects might make sense. > > Polymorphism isn't why object-oriented frameworks are successful. In > general, frameworks are successful because the problem application domain > was well understood before it was ever translated into code. Frameworks > tend to address a vertical line of business (some ill-defined problem > application domain) or a horizontal line of business (i.e., security). > Frameworks are also successful because they usually glue together > off-the-shelf software in interesting ways that rapidly solve problems. > > Also, if you want to make your code to be very simple, then just obey the > first rule of programming: figure out what you want to say before you figure > out how to say it. Meaningful abstractions can never be crafted in the > absence of a well-defined context. > > Programming language concepts don't make programming simple. Deep, > penetrating knowledge of the problem application domain makes programming > simpler. Having a language that you can easily translate that knowledge > into is also a boon, just as having off-the-shelf software that you can glue > into your architecture is a boon. > > > Michael B Allen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > OOP provides one major benefit - polymorphism. If you don't need > polymorphism, you should not be using OOP. But in some cases > polymorphism can make your code very simple and yet highly extensible. > It *can* be extremely powerful. > > ________________________________ > Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel > and lay it on us. > > > _______________________________________________ > New York PHP Community Talk Mailing List > http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk > > NYPHPCon 2006 Presentations Online > http://www.nyphpcon.com > > Show Your Participation in New York PHP > http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php > -- the Blog: http://www.utopiaparkway.com the Karma: http://www.coderswithconscience.com the Projects: http://flickr.com/photos/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ the Store: http://astore.amazon.com/httpwwwutopic-20 _______________________________________________ New York PHP Community Talk Mailing List http://lists.nyphp.org/mailman/listinfo/talk NYPHPCon 2006 Presentations Online http://www.nyphpcon.com Show Your Participation in New York PHP http://www.nyphp.org/show_participation.php
