From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: f5d71,7248e7bb77d059e8 X-Google-Attributes: gidf5d71,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: Bill Gooch Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/04 Message-ID: <32A5954D.47B2@iconcomp.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 202312346 references: <582lug$2n1@news4.digex.net> x-rtcode: 944a978e323883b508a59352 content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Icon Computing mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: bill@iconcomp.com newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.java,comp.object,comp.software-eng x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (WinNT; I) Date: 1996-12-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Ell wrote: > > : Bill Gooch wrote: > : > > : > Ahmed wrote: > : > > .... > : > > Some of these claims for instance > : > > 1 - high reusability of objects and frameworks > : > > : > While this may be claimed about specific frameworks, it is > : > not IMO a valid generalization about OOT. [Although] It is feasible > : > and important to design and implement objects which achieve > : > immediate *reuse*, general *reusability* is quite rare, and > : > exceedingly difficult to achieve, IME.... > > How about all of the objects that are reusable in PowerBuilder? Things > like Window, SQLCA, MLE, SLE, etc. objects which one uses time and time > again. Similarly with other frameworks like MFC, where one uses > CDocument, CDialog, CView etc classes time and time again.... Sure, there are generally reusable thingies out there, but mostly they are either of a very generic nature (like dialogs and documents), or they are targeted at a vertical niche market. In either case, the effort to develop them is much greater than that required for quality application- specific code, and their reusability is still limited. If you hit their limits, then you have to either extend them at your own expense, or start from scratch. This can be a very painful experience, depending on the circumstances (a few years ago, I had the misfortune of needing to extend Borland's OWL/C++ in Windows 3.1 - what a nightmare!). The bulk of OO code does not achieve general reusability, or any reusability at all outside of a very narrow scope. OTOH, immediate reuse is fairly common (I'd say it's a key characteristic of quality OO software). -- William D. Gooch bill@iconcomp.com Icon Computing http://www.iconcomp.com Texas liaison for the International Programmers Guild For IPG info, see http://www.ipgnet.com/ipghome.htm