Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)

>"Kellie Fitton" <KELLIEFITTON@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:20701054-5cb5->4abb-b841-15b85c63b8f8@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>You might find what my COBOL teacher said about OOP interesting:

>Begin quote:

[snip]

>Object oriented is simply an oversold and overhyped programming
>concept, without any clear benefits that can be fathomed in the
>IT world of business applications.   Nonetheless, object oriented
>design is mainly solutions to problems that COBOL does not have.

>End quote:

It is my understanding that, "in the IT world of business
applications"; most data is representational, not object.
The distinction is that the former has little or no behavior
while the latter does.

One problem with attempting to add behavior to
representational data is that the process is potentially
never-ending. One may add methods to the class to use
the data in one way, then add more methods to use it
another way, and so on. In formal OO design, this
requires opening the class to add the methods--a no-no
that violates the Open/Closed Principle. If inheritance is
used to extend the class, then inheritance can not be used
also for sub-classing, without creating "class spaghetti".
To avoid this problem, one simply leaves the data as is
and creates separate cl***** that have the required
behavior. For business information, these cl***** use
the paradigm "clerks performing procedures on or with
data", which is pretty much what COBOL programs
do now.