Timeline for Does Object Oriented Programming Really Model The Real World?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 4, 2013 at 13:29 | comment | added | clime | OO has no concept of sequencing, or state. Such a nonsense. There is no concept of sequencing and state in OOP?oO | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 21:29 | history | made wiki | Post Made Community Wiki by John Ruiz | ||
| Mar 2, 2012 at 19:13 | comment | added | leftaroundabout | Hard to believe she is a Java proponent when giving so many correct points of criticism against its overly narrow OO paradigm. And somewhat ridiculous she doesn't mention any of the languages that make it better (except "It's a huge improvement over its predecessor, C++."...). | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 17:21 | comment | added | Adam Robinson | this.MoveTo(Environment.Find<Bathroom>().OrderBy(b=>b.Distance(this)).First()); this.SitOn(Environment.Find<Toilet>().Where(t=>!t.IsOccupied).OrderBy(t=>t.Distance(this)).First().Component<Seat>()); this.DiscardWaste(HumanWasteType.All); | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 16:54 | comment | added | menacingly | It's vaguely defined (and involving the coordination of many systems) to get up and go to the restroom, but you would buckle under managing that complexity every time you need it. Nevermind the fact that the actuators are an implementation detail that is subject to change, while the intent rarely is. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 16:28 | comment | added | Mark E. Haase | Interesting I guess… but I've never wanted to write a program that brews coffee. The problem itself is vaguely defined. Does the program have access to hardware actuators, or is this a pure simulation? In either case, it seems like the object approach would provide a good place to start, either modeling the actuators involved or modeling the internal state of the actors and tools involved. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 16:10 | comment | added | menacingly | It's a weird feeling when you see such a compelling case made for something you still disagree with. I get the motivation for the quote, and it would be hard to word it better. I just don't know that it's a mistake to model our problems in the same way that our symbolic, relationship-oriented thought processes do. | |
| Mar 2, 2012 at 15:32 | history | answered | gnat | CC BY-SA 3.0 |