|
But what happens when you have developed a large application over many years, and you have thousands of these "objects". Is a new developer going to wade through the documentation for these maybe complex objects, or is he just going to create a new one , because he thinks his object is better that fred's. Then over a period of time would you end up with lots of different objects that do the same thing!!! So now we don't bother to re-use the objects apart from the core ones, we just create new ones each time, and it just becomes the sames mess that we have now. Has any large scale application been developed in JAVA, to test this theory!!! -----Original Message----- From: James W Kilgore [mailto:email@james-w-kilgore.com] Sent: Monday, March 22, 1999 3:41 AM To: MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com Subject: Re: IBM pushing Java Booth, I'm going to go out on a limb here and display my own position in the learning curve. About a year ago I picked up about 50lbs of Java books and here is what I've gotten out of it: (Now my terminology will probably not be correct, but I have to translate into lay terms so I can understand it) One could define a "name and address" object, which would include all rules of validation. It does not contain data. It is empty. To use this object, one would create an "instance". The instance (usage) does contain data. So in defining a "Customer" object, it can contain a "name and address" object. Even the "Customer" object is empty. The instance or maybe a better word may be the occurrence (This.customer) does contain the data. From a design point of view, the "name and address" object would not be capable of producing labels. A label writing object would be able to accept, as input, a "name and address" portion of objects customer, vendor, employee, subscriber, etc. In analogy may be: The DDS for a physical file does not contain any data. In RPG we process an occurrence of the physical file (a record). In real life, the "name and address" object would be a composite of a "name" object coupled to an "address" object. Therefore you would only define the rules for a name once. Well actually, you would have people names and company names which would have a totally different set of rules. Companies don't have first, middle, last names. OOps, that makes "name" three different objects! =:-o James W. Kilgore email@James-W-Kilgore.com boothm@ibm.net wrote: > > This seems to be the whole guts, right there. In the end, we need to be doing OO stuff. > > OO is mentioned through the months, and every cycle of discussions adds to my decidedly low level of OO comprehension. > > Hopefully this cycle will add, too. To help me understand the idea of OO: Lets talk about a particular data object, the "name and address" object. > <<snip>> +--- | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +--- +--- | This is the Midrange System Mailing List! | To submit a new message, send your mail to MIDRANGE-L@midrange.com. | To subscribe to this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-SUB@midrange.com. | To unsubscribe from this list send email to MIDRANGE-L-UNSUB@midrange.com. | Questions should be directed to the list owner/operator: david@midrange.com +---
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].
Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.