in reply to Re: OO design vs. procedural design (Was: From the Void and into the Light...)
in thread From the Void and into the Light...

I haven't mentioned functional programming simply because I've never wrote anything in functional languages (with exception for very small Emacs Lisp snipplets in my .emacs). In fact I have no opinion about them and I'm not ready to discuss them. My post was about 'OO vs. procedural'. Take this note in consideration before reading my reply.

I haven't said that several styles cannot work together. Moreover nothing in procedural programming actually implies bad design decisions. However I believe that for big projects human brains just cannot handle functional design. We have to create abstractions and it is easier for us to handle relationship between several classes of objects than relationship between numerous states of data structures and network of procedures (aka "call tree").

This is why I think humans can write better code (in big projects) when they follow mainly OO design (vs. procedural).

However in the bounds of some abstraction procedural design is acceptable probably (like in your example where actual event processor is quite isolated thing).

--
Ilya Martynov (http://martynov.org/)

  • Comment on Re: Re: OO design vs. procedural design

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: Re: OO design vs. procedural design
by dragonchild (Archbishop) on Dec 03, 2001 at 18:42 UTC
    Ok. A reason, which is solid, as to why you feel OO is the better design methodology for large projects. I can respect that.

    ------
    We are the carpenters and bricklayers of the Information Age.

    Don't go borrowing trouble. For programmers, this means Worry only about what you need to implement.