But i digress, my goal was not to discuss OOP/OOA/OOD in this level of detail. But to instead try and simplify some relatively complex ideas into short paragraphs for easy consumption, in the hopes that a common understanding/terminology would promote discussion
I applaud your effort, but I think you slightly missed the mark of "easy consumption" :-). I tend to agree with chromatic that it looks like you're relating each concept to interitance. I wonder if it would be possible to describe each concept with out comparing or referencing the others. Or perhaps create a taxonomy (we are talking about OOP right? :-) of object composition, code reuse, etc. so that when you're talking about idea X, people know that it trys to accomplish the same goals as ideas Y and Z. (Perhaps taxonomy is a bad word because it will end up looking more like Venn diagrams)
In reply to Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Object Terminology
by duff
in thread Object Terminology
by stvn
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |