what's the future of Object Oriented Programming
in [OOP]
|
Prev: Deriving - .NET example
Next: Polymorphism Downsides (was: what's the future of Object Oriented Programming)
From: frebe73 on 17 Sep 2006 10:19 > I fail to see what the > "disadvantages" of polymorphism could be (unless you count "doesn't > solve my actual problem" as a "disadvantage") Read my previous postings in this thread more carefully. Fredrik Bertilsson http://frebe.php0h.com
From: Bruno Desthuilliers on 17 Sep 2006 10:52 Patrick May a ?crit : > "Nick Malik [Microsoft]" <nickmalik(a)hotmail.nospam.com> writes: > (snip) > >>It's fun to discuss OO vs Relational with topmind... once. Some try >>more than once. Don't expect to change his opinion, though. > > > At this point I'm just trying to understand the path he took to > get to his current position. I'm afraid it boils down to having tried OOP with something like VB5/6 and any braindead "OO for dummies" book once...
From: frebe73 on 17 Sep 2006 11:21 > What killed the markup language? WYSIWYG editing, notably including > Microsoft Word, Borland Amipro and, of course, WordPerfect. But WYSIWYG editors didn't entirely kill HTML. For unexperienced web designers, WYSIWYG editors are a good help. But people making web applications for a living, normally prefer working directly with HTML. > When I first opened up an HTML page and looked inside, I felt like I tripped > back DECADES. Doesn't the huge sucess of HTML show that it picked up forgotten wisdom? > I still feel that way sometimes as I watch the web make most > of the same decisions, however slowly, that evolved into client/server > computing on the Windows platform. Are you saying that building a GUI using imperative languages for constructing GUI widgets, is better than a declarative GUI definition? > Fashion and computing both appear to run > in multi-decade cycles. Indeed, just look at the reinvention of network databases, called OO databases. Fredrik Bertilsson http://frebe.php0h.com
From: Rick Elbers on 17 Sep 2006 11:24 Nick, This is a common misconception. updatableViews lets clarify the name. An updatableView is something which allows you to insert/delete and update in a view( which is an arbitrary join of tables) as if you where working with a table. Micro$ doesnt deliver anything like that yet. Maybe if they understand what it is, they might in the future :-) Or maybe you show me how to work with a view of 4 related tables, inserting a few records in all tables, including new records related to new records in other tables and then and let the Dataset handle the sequence of inserts ? Rick Op Sat, 16 Sep 2006 18:09:27 -0700 schreef "Nick Malik [Microsoft]" <nickmalik(a)hotmail.nospam.com>: >"Rick Elbers" <rick(a)elbers.org> wrote in message >news:kpf8g2dad2nrrncp52ls8c97ot43vpc4kp(a)4ax.com... > ><<clip>> > >> ps: A good two-tier framework is still not constructed imho. Even .net >> doesnt have for instance updatableViews. >> > >Common misconception. The Dataset object is, in fact, completely updatable. >Since you can derive objects from this object, you can create a very clean, >typesafe, updatable view. See >http://msdn2.microsoft.com/en-us/library/esbykkzb.aspx > >-- >--- Nick Malik [Microsoft] > MCSD, CFPS, Certified Scrummaster > http://blogs.msdn.com/nickmalik > >Disclaimer: Opinions expressed in this forum are my own, and not >representative of my employer. > I do not answer questions on behalf of my employer. I'm just a >programmer helping programmers.
From: Phlip on 17 Sep 2006 12:08
Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: >>>Haven't you read Design Patterns? >> Yes, I have. But this debate is about advantages and disadvantages of >> polymorphism. Not about different design patterns. > I clearly see how polymorphism can help, but I fail to see what the > "disadvantages" of polymorphism could be (unless you count "doesn't solve > my actual problem" as a "disadvantage"). I tend to ask "Have you read /Design Patterns/" as short-hand for "Have you seen examples of OO techniques being used correctly, to simplify programs?" Bruno Desthuilliers wrote: > H. S. Lahman a ?crit : >> The long term future of OO lies in UML as a 4GL. > Lord, have mercy :( How can you test-first that?? Don't you have to then debug the contents of the UML diagram - the behaviors? Patrick May wrote: > "They laughed at Galileo, they laughed at Newton, but they also > laughed at Bozo the Clown." They laughed at my theories! Because my theories are funny!! The great thing about Topmind is he has learned so much OO theory, here, that he knows exactly what to say to lead anyone here to the pro-OO reply he expects. -- Phlip http://www.greencheese.us/ZeekLand <-- NOT a blog!!! |