Question for any programmers out there

[Phoenix]

Object oriented programming: do you find it reflects "natural thinking" or do you consider it to be artificial?

I'm not a programmer and I have to answer this question, it would be helpfull to have some qualified opinion.

Thanks

Ian

[Conor]

I am not an Object Orientated Bod, but I find it artifical and in some cases limiting.

[cod3r]

Originally Posted by iani

Object oriented programming: do you find it reflects "natural thinking" or do you consider it to be artificial?

Iani, no computer programming technique I've seen so far comes close to "natural thinking". The former must be rigid at all times and the latter is totally abstract.

Object oriented is still imperative, which means one instruction follows another. The difference between OO and procedural is deep under the covers. It's explained well in Bertrand Meyer's "Object-Oriented Software Engineering", but without considerable experience you may find it hard going and/or simply will not understand it. I do not know of an easier way.

Originally Posted by Conor

I am not an Object Orientated Bod, but I find it artifical and in some cases limiting.

How do you know it's "artificial" if you're not OO

Object oriented programming has a curve no doubt. In the beginning it will annoy you, because as it's imperative you will not be able to see its advantages. After a short while (1-2 yrs), well then you'll understand why OO is the way it is.


cod3r

[NeilP]

Originally Posted by iani

Object oriented programming: do you find it reflects "natural thinking" or do you consider it to be artificial?

I'm not a programmer and I have to answer this question, it would be helpfull to have some qualified opinion.

Thanks

Ian

Good question!
OO is great! Well, maybe not, but it tends to make life simpler than procedural programming once you get used to it.
We're starting to use Java a fiar bit so I guess for now I am full on OO.

I suppose that I find it a 'neater' way to code.

[nigelH]

Originally Posted by iani

Object oriented programming: do you find it reflects "natural thinking" or do you consider it to be artificial?

Natural thinking makes for bad programs.

Object Oriented stuff just tries to focus on the data structures and attach processes to manipulate them in close. It is one tool in the programmers toolbox but it can be just as easily done to death as any one-fits-all methodology. Its advantage is that you can treat the data-and-routines like a black box and not have to worry about what goes on inside. A well designed OOP lump can be reused from its description without ever 'going inside'. This can, if handled properly, save time = money.

The big problem with most OO programming is that things spend their CPU time moving numbers on and off stacks and nesting calls through layers and layers of redirection just to return a pointer.

If there are 15 of you working on a project OO make the design stage harder but the implementation easier and you probably won't notice it is slow. If I want to reuse predesigned or library stuff OO can save me time as all I am doing is stitching stuff together. However if you ask why does my 3GHz PC running XPpro run slower than the 100MHz machine I had a few years ago it is all that OO stuff burning the mill time.

I have two jobs on the desk at the moment. One involves multiple users running machine tools and tracking conforming/non-conforming materials and looks like OOP and SQL from here and the other is a test jig fixture that is going to be linear code assembler. Neither could use the other technique so I don't get much choice.

I've rambled about a bit... was that relevant?

[NeilP]

Originally Posted by nigelH

It is one tool in the programmers toolbox but it can be just as easily done to death as any one-fits-all methodology. Its advantage is that you can treat the data-and-routines like a black box and not have to worry about what goes on inside.

That's why I find it makes life easier .

[Phoenix]

Thanks for the feedback guys, I need to start learning this stuff, currently scheduled to be doing a Java module next April but will try to start learning well before then.

Ian

[cod3r]

Nigel, some valid stuff in there, some inaccuracies as well, esp. the design and performance stuff. Won't go into it in a diving forum, but keep an open mind

Originally Posted by nigelH

The big problem with most OO programming is that things spend their CPU time moving numbers on and off stacks and nesting calls through layers and layers of redirection just to return a pointer.

...

However if you ask why does my 3GHz PC running XPpro run slower than the 100MHz machine I had a few years ago it is all that OO stuff burning the mill time.

OO is not much slower than procedural. Method calls are just as efficient as procedural function/subroutine calls unless they're "virtual" methods. In fact the OO compiler will implement a method call as a procedural function call. Overall on average the performance limitation will be in the region of 1-5%, in most cases the code can be crafted to be just as efficient. I'm not talking about Java here of course

My current project is for BT. Last was France Telecom. Ran on Sun E10000, 64 processor servers. But then maybe because of OO?

cod3r

[Conor]

Originally Posted by cod3r

How do you know it's "artificial" if you're not OO

How can someone Know that DIR is strict without being DIR?

I mean I am not a OO Believer, I don't go along with the idea that its an appropriate choice for every system. I think it has its place and if it is used appropriately can make modelling and delivery a shed load easier....If it is used in the right place.

[ahar]

I find OO programming closer to natural thinking than proceedural, but not that much. If you've done some coding before then it'll be easier to learn Java than if you're new to it. If you haven't done any before, a good first step might be to try Visual Basic - it'll help with some basic programming concepts before tackling Java.

Nigel / Cod3r - are you talking about the difference between compiled and interpreted code ? As I remember there is not much difference between compiled proceedural and OO code, but there can be a huge difference between compiled proceedural programme (COBOL ?) and an interpreted OO programme (Java etc). You just need to look at Borland J Builder - the whole of that was written in Java and is interpreted - open it up and the thing grinds away for ages on the splash screen !