If I may be so presumptious as to paraphrase Dr. Davis' explanation
here: When you create an object, you do not know in advance what
messages may be sent to that object or when. the object only responds
to the messages it receives. Think of an ant colony on the move. Each
ant knows how to respond when its neighbor moves to the right or the
left, but whatever intelligence there may be in an ant colony doesn't
reside in the individual ants but, rather, in how they interact as a
group. It's easier to build an ant, if you will, than it is to build
an ant colony. Similarly, individual object or classes can be much
more manageable than a single monolithic application.
===
Gregory Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Design quality doesn't ensure success, but design failure can ensure
failure."
--Kent Beck
On Jul 12, 2005, at 6:41 PM, Richard G. DAVIS wrote:
The sole distinction in object oriented programming is the
possibility that
that same phrase that invokes another program is non-
deterministic. There
is always the 'possibility' that the program that is ultimately
invoked may
be a program about which the programmer has little or no
knowledge. Even
the nomenclature used by the programmer in the master program to
declare the
invoked program may not be that which is used to identify the
program that
is ultimately executed.
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the 'Do More With Dual!' webinar happening
July 14 at 8am PDT/11am EDT. We invite you to explore the latest in dual
core and dual graphics technology at this free one hour event hosted by HP,
AMD, and NVIDIA. To register visit http://www.hp.com/go/dualwebinar
_______________________________________________
Hardhats-members mailing list
Hardhats-members@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/hardhats-members
