Re: What is wrong with OO ?

[Tansel Ersavas <tansel@deep.net>]

... Disucssion deleted

> >It seems those who've "got" OO blame the people. Maybe we
> >should blame the hammer. Maybe OO just won't work in
> >the mass market of building applications. Not that it
> >can't, but that it doesn't work often enough to make it
> >universally appropriate.
> 
>   Or maybe it's just taught poorly. I've been pretty successful in
> teaching OOP to people who don't know it already. However, it takes an
> awful lot of work on both the instructor's and the student's part, as
> well as a proper approach. That is, rather than my trying to cram
> dozens of constructs down the student's throat, we take them slowly
> and in the proper sequence. The student won't know as many facts when
> we get done as if he'd read a "Learn C++ in Five Seconds" book, but he
> or she will KNOW and UNDERSTAND the material I've taught.
>

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Before we discuss 'what is wrong with OO', shouldn't we discuss what is
wrong with the current popular paradigm, procedure orientation.
Most of us seem to have forgotten it is just a historical accident that
we program the way we do in procedural approach, and if we are in a
total mess as software developers, one of the biggest reasons is our
insistence on procedure orientation. Most of the current OO
implementations carry a legacy of people with procedure oriented
background, and that reflects quite badly on the projects. Languages
that easily allow such escapes also contribute to this phenomena.

Once we accept the problems of the procedure orientation (see my
previous posting to comp.object about the subject) then we can look at
the alternatives. 

When we conquer new places, the first to go usually perish. It is tough
to be a pioneer. However, with persistence and perseverence, we build
necesary access and support systems, and that new place becomes very
hospitable and finally, a source of great wealth. Luckily, time for
being a pioneer in OO is just about to pass. Now comes better times and
even prosperity.

There are three major reasons why OO projects fail. All of them are
stated by the great wisdom of Jedi in "Star Wars".

These are:
    "Do or do not. There is no try"
    Using my tools and techniques, I can prove you that I can produce
    better and faster systems using OO (Please read my notes at the end
    of this message). If I can do it, so you can.If you just try to do
    it, you will fail. Be determined to do it.

    "You must unlearn what you have learned"
    People cling so heavily to the baggage they have been carrying, 
    they can not have an open mind about OO. SO the first thing I do
    in my training sessions is to create doubts and  questions about 
    the problems of the procedural approach, and why procedure
    orientation is a very ineffective technique for most new problems.
    Of course, you should have a very good mentor that is capable of
    demonstrating these in practical terms. 

    "You must believe in what you are doing"
    OO will help you. It will feel awkward at times, but you must
    persist with it. You will be eventually rewarded.

Coming to the question of "What is wrong with OO" the question should
read "What are the problems in the current state of OO that slows down
it's progress". 

There three major problems that slows down OO.
.  Lack of expertise, personal and team skills (human issues)
.  Lack of fast, efficient and practical tools-environments that make
   programming one of the the most labor-oriented, miserable works
   available Today
.  Lack of practical OO application techniques and ways that will
   integrate OO with other succesful paradigms

Current state of OO suffers from all of the above. Each and every one of
these problems are soluble, Indeed as a company, we are working on and
have at least intermediate solutions for all of them. 

BTW I get a much better response for OO from children. For that reason,
I'll offer educational versions my tools and techniques to schools so
that children can be exposed to these techniques before their minds are
clutterd by the current dominant paradigms.
 
Tansel Ersavas
RASE Inc.
mailto:tansel@deep.net
http://www.rase.com/