Hitoshi Ozawa wrote:
> Gregg,
> I agree with your points. Most people do not want or have the time to
> learn good OO before entering a project. However, practices and tools
> are making developers who are not too knowledgeable about OO
> able to create good OO applications. IMHO, I think OO is reaching a
Hmmm, that's interesting....
For me, design, OO or otherwise requires a certain amount of
creativity/art which is something that can only be partially distilled
into tools and practices.
Sure you can produce a half-decent application using tools/practices but
it's going to have some share of the same kinds of issues we see with
auto-generated code.
> maturity level so not all people have to know OO, but I don't think this
> implies OO is on a decline or is becoming less important.
>
Indeed.
And if your assertion re: tools and patterns is true, then most
developers need to stop imagining themselves to also be
designers/architects - they've turned this responsibility over to tools
and patterns.
> For example. Ruby is an OO language, but Rails can be used without
> knowing OO concepts.
Certainly - the question is, would you build a better app if you _did_
know the OO concepts and apply them well?
Also, maybe OO simply isn't relevant to Rails anymore given it's move
back to CRUD.
Nice post by the way,
Dan.
>
> H.Ozawa
>
> Gregg Wonderly wrote:
>
>> William Henry wrote:
>>> And when you consider some other innovations like REST and the rise in
>>> dynamic languages and Web 2.0 you begin to wonder if OO's importance
>>> might be in decline (though many dynamic/scripting languages support
>>> object orientation). I'm not saying OO is in decline and I'm not saying
>>> it is a good thing that OO wold decline - before I get jumped on.
>> I think there are some interesting things happening with OO. One, is that
>> people don't want to spend time learning about good OO design when
>> their copy
>> and paste editors work 100 to 1000 times faster. One or two off code
>> cloning
>> is perhaps the fasted 'reuse' strategy around. When you do that,
>> inheritence
>> and object hierarchies are not as interesting. When you pass XML or other
>> non-live objects over the wire, type consistency is a non-issue. So,
>> again,
>> having an object type that both sides recognize as the same 'type'
>> doesn't
>> really matter.
>>
>> >From my viewpoint, what is happening with scripting languages and
>> other related
>> technolgies is that the new kids on the block who don't have time or
>> want to
>> spend time learning (the gaming generation at its best, play before
>> pay), are
>> choosing the simplest most tool driven path that they can find.
>>
>> Gregg Wonderly
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
