|
|
|
good chemistry is complicated, and a little bit messy -LW |
|
| PerlMonks |
Comment on |
| ( #3333=superdoc: print w/ replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
|
Id be interested in your experience/opinions of problems that are best modelled without using OO.
You suggest GPS satelites requiring a different notion of time; but i dont see why that would invalidate the use of encapsulation and an interface? With all due respect, I find your 'microscopic chair' and 'Day/Night' examples embarassingly ill-thought out. The rest of your comments dont seem particularly tied to OO - and many of these issues are further compounded in another paridigm. I have always held the same view, but am yet to find a compelling reason to not use OO; one that doesnt amount to semantic pedantry, saving keystrokes/CPU cycles, or accomodating Computer Science obscurities. thanks In reply to Re: The world is not object oriented
by Anonymous Monk
|
|