by Bruce McFarling <agila61@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
Mar 27, 2008 at 06:58 PM
On Mar 27, 6:11 pm, Jonah Thomas <jethom...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> *You need methods to work around the benefits your objects give you.*
> *You need methods to flexibly handle extreme complexity.*
> *You need methods to reduce the expense of all this OO complexity.*
But from what I dimly recall, from the stance of an outside observer
since before OO programming took the microcomputer file by storm, the
original object programming patterns were not distilled from
experience in working with OO languages. The original object
programming patterns were distilled from experience in working with
problems that fit object oriented programming so much better than
structural procedural programming that people were programming in an
object oriented style in structural procedural languages.
Remember that Graphical User Interfaces were forcing applications to
respond to users as if they were composed of a variety of objects of
different types. Doing that by building a collection of artificial
objects is a very direct way to go about it.
