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: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public From: pcg@aber.ac.uk (Piercarlo Grandi) Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/04 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 202326228 sender: pcg@osfb.aber.ac.uk references: <32A4659D.347A@shef.ac.uk> organization: Prifysgol Cymru, Aberystwyth newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object,comp.software-eng Date: 1996-12-04T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: >>> "ACQ95AA" == Ahmed writes: ACQ95AA> Hello Every Body I am a new research student working at the ACQ95AA> field of Object Oriented Technology...I have several critical ACQ95AA> opinions about Object Oriented in general, and I like to ACQ95AA> participate it with you and hear you expert comments and ACQ95AA> opinions ACQ95AA> Object Oriented Technology came with quite promising claims ACQ95AA> that if achieved can benefit the software development companies ACQ95AA> and organisations millions of pounds. ACQ95AA> Some of these claims for instance ACQ95AA> 1 - high reusability of objects and frameworks Of objects? What do you mean? As to ``frameworks'', which I choose to interpret here as ``libraries of software modules'', there is no guarantee that by using OO one _does_ achieve _high_ reusability; one _can_ achieve _higher_ reusability. Whether higher reusability _is_ achieved depends on many factors other than the adoption of OO technology, and whether the reusability achieved is _high_ depends among other things on the problem domain. That it is _possible_ to achieve _higher_ reusability with OO than other approaches is substantiated by some sparse but compelling evidence. ACQ95AA> 2 - Resilience to change, i.e. low software maintenance and ACQ95AA> evolution cost As a _possible_ consequence of _possibly_ _higher_ reuse. Again, there is some sparse but compelling evidence that this actually happens. ACQ95AA> 3 - Easier understanding by the user and Natural transition ACQ95AA> between the analysis, design, implementation because they all ACQ95AA> use tangible perceived objects. This is not a claim in OO technology, but in OO speak, in other words it is purely marketing hype unsubstantiated by any evidence whatsoever. You won't find any such claim in anything but marketing drivel. Any such claim, as you write it, is also manifestly absurd: the very notion of something that is both "tangible perceived" is amusing to say the least. ACQ95AA> However the reality is not so bright as claimed.. Indeed, because most all OO-speak salesmen paint a rosy picture as you describe it above. OO in and by itself does not magically and necessarily "achieve" the magic of "high reusability", and in particular because there is no reason why the use of "tangible perceived objects" should give any benefit like "Easier understanding by the user". ACQ95AA> if so, then nobody today thought to develop a software on the ACQ95AA> traditional structural methods... Software technologies depend more on sociological than technological factors. In particular on the twenty-year cycle of induction of new generations of computer scientists in industry, and their reaching ``manager'' status. ACQ95AA> My question is what is wrong with OO ? why it did not achieved ACQ95AA> its targets yet.? What are the main obstacles? Inflated expectations? Marketing drivel? Facile abuse of OO-speak? Thsoe that do practice OO as a technology and not as the promise of the age of Acquarium in CS find it a very useful concept that does deliver some measurable benefits. I find the discussion of OO and other issues in the second edition of "The Mythical Man Month" a rather good argumentation of some of the issues involved.