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=1.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,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: 109fba,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 10461e,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid10461e,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,7f8fc37d854731d6 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: Paul_Gover@uk.ibm.com Subject: Re: Interesting but sensitive topic to discuss (HELP: - OOP and CASE tools) Date: 1996/11/06 Message-ID: <55pqr5$136a@grimsel.zurich.ibm.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 194843209 references: <32813322.41C6@kyebek3.kjist.ac.kr> organization: IBM Warwick Development Group reply-to: Paul_Gover@uk.ibm.com newsgroups: comp.object,comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.ada,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.ai Date: 1996-11-06T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In <32813322.41C6@kyebek3.kjist.ac.kr>, Dong Oh Kim writes: > ... >Let me have your opinions about followings: > > 1. Is everything OK with existing oo development methods? > If not, what are needed? and what stage should be enforced in the > future,i.e,analysis or design,etc...? > ... OK, here's my 2 cents: most OO development methods concentrate too much on objects and too little on classes. This obstructs investigation of inheritance and polymorphism, making it hard to attain the benefits of OO. IMHO, in many cases this is because the design method derives from some entity modelling tool from before the days of OO, and entities are objects, not classes. Paul Gover IBM Warwick Development Group Mumbling for myself, not IBM