19 Feb
2015
19 Feb
'15
7:44 p.m.
>> I never could figure out the point of
Objects.
> The point of objects is to support data abstraction by disallowing
> any old random code in a large system from directly manipulating the
> innards of the objects, and instead require that to be done by
> methods declared to be part of the object.
Well, I'd say that's one of the points. You can get similar effects in
(for example) plain old C by not exporting (for example) struct
definitions.
I don't know what the original point of OO coding was. But I would say
that now, OO is not so much any particular language feature (such as
internals hiding) or any single goal (such as abstraction) as it is a
mindset. I would say that OO code can be written in any language
(well, any general-purpose language; some esolangs, such as Malbolge or
Befunge, are so difficult to use at all that OO is probably out of
reach), right down to assembler.
/~\ The ASCII Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
X Against HTML mouse at rodents-montreal.org
/ \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B