Hitoshi Ozawa wrote:It's on selecting the right tools AND developing guidelines on using +1. My experience is that without this sort of guidance, a development project will fail - if not on release 1, then at some time in the not too distant future. And OO techniques certainly give you a lot more scope for pattern application than procedural code, so I would always recommend an OO-based approach. In fact, I cannot see any justification for not using OO in a software development project, SOA or otherwise. You can always write procedural code inside an object if you wish (in fact, you can simulate object-orientation using a procedural language too - anyone else here remember Objective-C? - but that's by the by). So why not use design techniques that offer more to the power user? You are in no way obliged to take full advantage of them, if for some reason you happen to prefer pre-1967 coding styles. -- All the best Keith http://keith.harrison-broninski.info__._,_.___
SPONSORED LINKS
YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
__,_._,___ |
- Re: [service-orientated-architecture] John on Gar... Keith Harrison-Broninski
- Re: [service-orientated-architecture] John o... Hitoshi Ozawa
- Re: [service-orientated-architecture] Jo... Dan Creswell
