No substance that I could find

Post #70,916 by tablizer 12/26/02 11:30:42 AM Reply	No substance that I could find (* You have answered only the postscript/appendix and appeared to have completely ignored the main body of the post. *) Because it contained nothing concrete. It seemed to be saying that words (code) are better than tables, or something vaguely of the sort, without any EXTERNAL justification. I could find nothing usable in what you said. I would suggest you try code samples or something. English aint working. Most OO justification writing reads to me like a sales brochure. It talks alot but says nothing specific. OO appears to be an emotional state, and not 2+2=4 sort of reasoning. I am sorry, but that is my honest interpretation. I swear I am not "trolling", but trying to figure why the hell people dig this spahgetti shit called OO. ________________ oop.ismad.com
Post #71,086 by orion 12/27/02 12:32:35 PM Reply	OO has a better form that Procedural programming in fact some languages already use OO in some form like Visual BASIC. Just doing a Form1.Label1.caption = "Bryce" is sort of like OO programming already without defining your own structures. Also VB can allow me to type in a period and then it offers me a drop down box of the items in that object to choose from, the properties and methods that is. Just that I wonder why so many IT Managers are against OO programming in VB? But now many want to use Classes, and then other objects like ActiveX DLL controls now. Perhaps it will change? Bryce stick to what you think works best, but good luck finding a job in an OO world. ;) For an Alternative Nearly To Imitate IWETHEY please visit [link\|http://pub75.ezboard.com/bantiiwethey\|the ANTIIWETHEY Board] providing an alternative to IWETHEY since December 2002
Post #71,102 by tablizer 12/27/02 3:39:27 PM Reply	but what about biz modeling? in fact some languages already use OO in some form like Visual BASIC. Just doing a Form1.Label1.caption = "Bryce" is sort of like OO programming already without defining your own structures. That is because VB defines them. Besides, one could do: setCaption("form1","label1", myName) Or setAttribute("form1","label1", "caption", myName) There are other possible approaches. True, this is less "built-in", but that also allows other tools to create the GUI, and even manage it in real-time. IOW, it is a more generic approach rather than tied into one particular language because the language does not have to manage and store the GUI structure directly. Also VB can allow me to type in a period and then it offers me a drop down box of the items in that object to choose from Fancy IDE's couldn't be made for P/R also? Besides, I would like to see how OO shines for business modeling, not so much GUI's and IDE's. I can live with OO GUI's. They are the least of my OO headaches. stick to what you think works best, but good luck finding a job in an OO world. There's the rub: gotta eat yellow snow to survive. ________________ oop.ismad.com
Post #71,106 by johnu 12/27/02 3:56:51 PM Reply	Re: but what about biz modeling? Besides, I would like to see how OO shines for business modeling, not so much GUI's and IDE's. I can live with OO GUI's. They are the least of my OO headaches. There is a rich supply of literature about using OO for business modeling. An excellent new book that is coming out is at [link\|http://domainlanguage.com/\|http://domainlanguage.com/]. You can download the draft for free. Now if you could just read it with an open mind... Regards, John Urberg
Post #71,112 by tablizer 12/27/02 4:18:59 PM Reply	what others? There is a rich supply of literature about using OO for business modeling Aside from the cited draft book (still downloading), what existing books would you recommend? Somebody mentioned a Martin Fowler book, but I found some distasteful practices in it. Mr. Fowler does not seem to "get" relational databases, so he reinvents his own NDB and HDB in app code. ________________ oop.ismad.com
Post #71,133 by johnu 12/27/02 5:22:01 PM Reply	Re: what others? Aside from the cited draft book (still downloading), what existing books would you recommend? Somebody mentioned a Martin Fowler book, but I found some distasteful practices in it. Mr. Fowler does not seem to "get" relational databases, so he reinvents his own NDB and HDB in app code. There is nothing I can recommend to someone who doesn't understand a domain model is not reinventing a database... Regards, John Urberg
Post #71,165 by tablizer 12/27/02 10:05:02 PM 12/27/02 10:20:58 PM Reply	The fault is on your side, not mine There is nothing I can recommend to someone who doesn't understand a domain model is not reinventing a database... Well then Chris Date must be a retard then. All those big-name campuses buying and teaching from books by a retard. Whatta racket! ________________ oop.ismad.com Edited by tablizer Dec. 27, 2002, 10:20:58 PM EST Expand All History
Post #71,131 by tablizer 12/27/02 5:12:16 PM Reply	comments on Domain-Driven Design I finally downloaded it, but don't see a lot of examples nor source code. UML can be implemented many different ways. ________________ oop.ismad.com
Post #71,150 by static 12/27/02 7:59:22 PM Reply	I don't believe you. Using object-oriented programming practices works to improve my productivity. You are not going to change that. But I use lots of techniques in programming. Go learn how to write a compiler, Bryce. You obviously don't know this and I recall a lengthy thread some years ago where you also demonstrated this conclusively. Once you actually know how a compiler works, then my post about symbol tables will make sense. Wade. Microsoft are clearly boiling the frogs.
Post #71,164 by tablizer 12/27/02 10:01:51 PM Reply	Compiler shit is a red herring Using object-oriented programming practices works to improve my productivity. You are not going to change that. I don't necessarily question that. Just don't extrapolate it to everyone else. Go learn how to write a compiler, Bryce. You obviously don't know this and I recall a lengthy thread some years ago where you also demonstrated this conclusively. Once you actually know how a compiler works, then my post about symbol tables will make sense. Red herring. Compilers have nothing to do with this discussion. Besides, I prefer interpreted langauges. ________________ oop.ismad.com

Welcome to IWETHEY!