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: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 11cae8,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid11cae8,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: Daniel Drasin Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/05 Message-ID: <32A71BC6.2D857063@arscorp.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 202554030 references: <32A4659D.347A@shef.ac.uk> content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Applied Reasoning 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 3.0Gold (X11; I; SunOS 4.1.3 sun4c) Date: 1996-12-05T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Ahmed wrote: > > Hello Every Body > > I am a new research student working at the field of Object Oriented Technology...I have several > critical opinions about Object Oriented in general, and I like to participate it with you and hear > you expert comments and opinions > > 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 thought 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? > My $0.02. The problems I've seen with OO projects arise not from the use of OO, but from the misuse of OO. Programmers trying to use non-OO methods, incorrectly applying OO concepts, etc. This is a result of a lack of OO teaching at eductational institutions. Even schools that offer 1 or 2 OO language courses usually fail to educate; they use C++ and only really teach the "C" part. There are very few universities that make an effort to inculcate students with an understanding of OO techiniques and methods. So it's no wonder when these graduates try to apply them in the "real world," they get all fouled up. Dan -- Daniel Drasin Applied Reasoning drasin@arscorp.com 2840 Plaza Place, Suite 325 (919)-781-7997 Raleigh, NC 27612 http://www.arscorp.com