[UPHPU] Article 3 posted

dataw0lf digitalsuicide at gmail.com
Mon Jun 27 13:30:51 MDT 2005


Jacob Wright wrote:
> The third article <http://www.jacwright.com/blog/20/planning-systems/> on 
> object-oriented programming is posted. It is entitled Planning
> Systems<http://www.jacwright.com/blog/20/planning-systems/>.
> Happy reading.

> also a suedo-reply to the oop discussions from last week

Heh.  I thought your 'pseudo-reply' was right above it, actually ( i.e.,
how many people in the mailing list don't understand OOP, according to
you ).  I'd like to clarify some things.

Many of us do know how to implement (and use it on various contracts /
jobs in other languages) OOP.  We understand the benefits.  However, we
understand the tradeoffs as well. 'The best tool for the job' so to speak.

Some might not know that OOP was created specifically for a several
specialized types of programming: chief among them was modelling natural
phenomena (animals, weather patterns, the like). It then spread, rather
naturally in my opinion, to the Windows and fellow GUI development
areas.  I mean, it makes _sense_ to do UI programming in OOP.  This,
however, doesn't mean it should be applied to all other areas.

Unfortunately, people seem to think that this is the case ('OMGZ
encapsulation and inheritance' -- but aren't they rather contradictory,
once you delve into it further?) Personally, I don't use OOP unless it's
warranted (and in PHP, this is extremely rare, for me anyway).  I think
that alot of programmers just think it's incredibly fun to create
classes (it is) and go off on this tangent without understanding that
functional programming could easily accomplish the same objective, and
probably accomplish it with 1) less development time and 2) less code.

-- 

Joshua Simpson -- dataw0lf.org
Lead Network Administrator/Engineer Aero-Graphics Inc.
jsimpson at aero-graphics.com



More information about the UPHPU mailing list