Re: Documenting Individual Objects

[mole-end!mat@uunet.uu.net]

In article <henley.930422074136@einstein.che.eng.auburn.edu>, henley@eng.auburn
.edu (James Paul Henley) writes:
> In article <thinmanC5uu1E.Hyo@netcom.com> thinman@netcom.com (Technically Swe
et) writes:
> >johnson@cs.uiuc.edu (Ralph Johnson) writes:

> >>The reason for this is that (in my opinion) documenting a single
> >>class is easy, and is similar to traditional function-oriented
> >>documentation, but documenting object-interactions is much harder.
 ...
> >Perhaps you should be able to specify when and how objects interact?
> >Then you wouldn't need to document... the code would serve.

 ...
> In a dynamic chemical process simulation using OO methods, I doubt if there
> are many non-chemical engineers who could describe the object interations.
> The object interactions is the heart of the simulation, but that requires
> domain specific knowledge to understand.  ...
 
> So, it requires a domain expert to document how the objects work together.
> That is the point that gets lost all too often, but is the key factor in
> making OO successful.

Which is why most of the interesting OO examples are taken from computing
problems (including human-machine interface).
-- 
 (This man's opinions are his own.)
 From mole-end				Mark Terribile

 mat@mole-end.matawan.nj.us, Somewhere in Matawan, NJ