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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 11cae8,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid11cae8,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: Ahmed Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/04 Message-ID: <32A5A86A.1AF1@shef.ac.uk>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 202328286 references: <32A4659D.347A@shef.ac.uk> cc: a.alkooheji@dcs.shef.ac.uk content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Computer Science, University of Sheffield , UK mime-version: 1.0 newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lnag.java,comp.object,comp.software-eng x-mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win16; I) Date: 1996-12-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Harry Protoolis wrote: > > On Tue, 03 Dec 1996 17:38:37 +0000, Ahmed wrote: > >Hello Every Body > >Object Oriented Technology came with quite promising claims that if achieved can > > benefit the software > >development companies and organisations millions of pounds. > > > >Some of these claims for instance > >1 - high reusability of objects and frameworks > >2 - Resilience to change, i.e. low software maintenance and evolution cost > >3 - Easier understanding by the user and Natural transition between the analysis > > , design, > >implementation because they all use tangible perceived objects. > > > >However the reality is not so bright as claimed..if so, then nobody today though > > t to develop a > >software on the traditional structural methods... > > > >My question is what is wrong with OO ? why it did not achieved its targets yet.? > >What are the main obstacles? > > I think this is overly negative, OO has not been and never will be a > 'silver bullet' to solve all software development problems, but no-one > but a few spin doctors ever claimed it would be. > > However, the real question should be 'has OO made a significant positive > difference', and in my experience the answer is a resounding 'yes!'. > Dear Harry, I agree with you that OO has many advantages, but I can not feel that significant improvement as you said, The important question is how measure the success of OO, Can you please tell me on what crieteria you mesured this significant difference is it ( code reusibility / software development time / software performace / software reliablity/ software cost / software portablity / ...etc .. ) these issues that count for any organization actually I am looking for any references that compares " with figures and statistics" between different applications developped using OO and the traditional methods. All what I have found are examples that show OO is workable, for me this is not an evidence to the significant difference" Another thing, Since you are familiar with OO, Could you please tell me what is the best environment to develop an OO application, ( in my case most of our applications are database systems ) Thank you very much Regards, Ahmed > Cheers, > Harry > - > alt.computer pty ltd software development consultants