Re: What is wrong with OO ?

[Ahmed <ACQ95AA@shef.ac.uk>]

Bill Gooch wrote:
> 
> Ahmed wrote:
> >
> > Does this mean,If two organizations developed almost typical applications
> > does not mean that the objects developed can be reusable between them..
> > Is not this a deficiency in OO.
> 
> As compared to what?  Non-OO software?  I think not.
> 

Compared to the Object concept and its capability ..!!

> Two different automobile designs rarely share any
> compatible parts (except those which are industry-
> standardized, like oil filters), unless the designers
> worked together with that goal in mind.
> 

I think this is a good example for comparison,

Does every car-company develop the car from a to z ?  I doubt it ..!
There are special companies dedicated only to develop specific spare parts for the cars,

It is true that the spare parts are not compatible ( in general ) between different car models, 
However almost all cars share the same level of abstraction,

when you say a "radiator" to a mechnical engineer he will immediately understand its functionality,
no matter if it is a Mercedece or Honda car.
When you say to a mechanic "piston" "shaft" "gear-box" "clutch" "handbrake" ...etc. ( you name it )
then an Immediate image will draw in his mind and will grasp a general perception

Even if you go to lower levels, each part has a name and a main function,

Without this common abstaction between cars then the job of any mechanics will be almost
imposible. Otherwise every car model will require a dedicated mechanical engineer.


> > Every programmer is tackling the same problem using his own perception
> > of the problem..his own abstraction..
> 
> Yes, and the alternative is?...
> 

In my openion, to get the advantage of OO capability, there must be an 
agreement on the abstraction level of every domain. This should turn into standard abstaction 
 accessable for any softwaer developer. There should be an institute or company to take this 
responsibility. Otherwise people will always reenvent the weel by inventing their trivial classes 
localy which is a waste of a valuable resource .. ( Programmers )


> > The concept behind OO is that it deals with peices of software as
> > tangible objects exactly as real world works..
> 
> Not at all.  "How the real world works" is by no means
> obvious or well understood ("real world" in itself is
> an exceedingly vague term), and you'd need to provide
> some definitions of these things, as well as evidence
> to support the above assertion.
> 

I feel that this is a more phylosifical  answer than being practical.
Yes you need to provide some definitions for tricky words that might
give different semantics, however trivail words in the proper context
are self explainatory ..!!

> > however in real world
> > every object has a clear behaviour and perception by every body,
> 
> Not in the slightest.
> 
> > while in the OO software each object has a behaviour according to
> > the perception of his designer..!!
> 
> Sometimes.  The designer probably hopes it does.
> 
> > The problem is that many organization avoid moving toword OO because
> > the transfter cost to OO ( training programmers / organization change in
> > standards / new tools / new analysis and design methods / legacy
> > system/ etc. ) are much higher than the benifit of "immediate reuse"
> 
> OK - why is this a problem?

This means that OOP did  not yet prove or show its greate advantages  in many domains. So
It needs efforts more before being accepted widely. I believe that OO has the power to do so
but ( probably ) the wrong usage of it is preventing its remarkable success in certain
areas.


> 
> > Another point regarding inheritance, we know that Visiual Basic does not
> > have the capability of inheritance, however you can build a system
> > much faster  compared to using visiual C++ with much less code.
> 
> Depends what system, doesn't it?  VB isn't ideal for
> all computer applications; C++ is probably a better
> choice for at least some of them.
> 

Agree with you that C++ is much more powerful that VB in certain areas ..
But What prevent an OOP from exceeding a non OOP in all areas ..?


Regards,
Ahmed

> --
> 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