Re: Re: Object Terminology

Edward

Please don't take any of this as negative criticism.

Not at all. Your comments are exactly what i am looking for!

I can see now that comments like "greatly misunderstood" are really too much my opinion, and probably need to either edited out or explained better. I was initially not going to provide any links, since i felt it might muddy up the simplicity, but you make a good point, so maybe I will provide a "further reading" type section.

Anybody got any good OO links they want to suggest, I am all ears. (I've got my own, but I dont know them all)

Your specific comments in particular are right on. I will take them all under advisement as i do the first re-write.

Thanks again, excellent comments.

-stvn

Comment on Re: Re: Object Terminology

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^3: Object Terminology by oylee (Pilgrim) on Jan 12, 2004 at 16:33 UTC
Here's a start: http://www.artima.com has a plethora of good OOD information and enlightened interviews with smart, opinionated, people. This is one of the few newsletters I've ever subscribed to. http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ObjectOrientedProgramming and if you want to get all object orienty up in there, try http://c2.com/cgi/like?ObjectOrientedProgramming as well... http://www.brent.worden.org/articles/index.html - where I learned about the Liskov Substitution Principle, the Open-Closed Principle, How To Love The Bomb, and various other For No Real Reason Capitalized Things Etc. I have to get back to work now x) As a side note, I would emphasize that interfaces in Java also represent a sort of inherent 'contract', basically saying, "All objects of this type will have these methods, and those methods should do this". They impose a type constraint over the object, which in turn allows for polymorphism without inheritance, which in turn is a good thing. Inheritance breaks encapsulation by giving you intimate knowledge and access to your super classes' wibbly bits. The bottom line is you should usually give some thought to whether or not a class is going to be inherited from, and what will happen if it is inherited from. Otherwise, overriding certain behavior and not others can break code in unpredictable ways (this has bitten me on the ass enough times to make me worry about it). Of course, there are many times when inheritance is useful, and I certainly do use it a lot. Superclasses are typically very bare abstract classes with only common behavior, however, and are not typically instantiated by themselves. But that's just like, my opinion, man :). Allen	[reply]

Replies are listed 'Best First'.

Re^3: Object Terminology
by oylee (Pilgrim) on Jan 12, 2004 at 16:33 UTC

http://www.artima.com has a plethora of good OOD information and enlightened interviews with smart, opinionated, people. This is one of the few newsletters I've ever subscribed to.
http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?ObjectOrientedProgramming and if you want to get all object orienty up in there, try http://c2.com/cgi/like?ObjectOrientedProgramming as well...
http://www.brent.worden.org/articles/index.html - where I learned about the Liskov Substitution Principle, the Open-Closed Principle, How To Love The Bomb, and various other For No Real Reason Capitalized Things
Etc. I have to get back to work now x)

should

Of course, there are many times when inheritance is useful, and I certainly do use it a lot. Superclasses are typically very bare abstract classes with only common behavior, however, and are not typically instantiated by themselves.

But that's just like, my opinion, man :).
Allen

[reply]