Chapter2 - 2 Criteria of object orientation In the previous...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
2 Criteria of object orientation I n the previous chapter we explored the goals of the object-oriented method. As a preparation for parts B and C , in which we will discover the technical details of the method, it is useful to take a quick but wide glance at the key aspects of object-oriented development. Such is the aim of this chapter. One of the benefits will be to obtain a concise memento of what makes a system object-oriented. This expression has nowadays become so indiscriminately used that we need a list of precise properties under which we can assess any method, language or tool that its proponents claim to be O-O. This chapter limits its explanations to a bare minimum, so if this is your first reading you cannot expect to understand in detail all the criteria listed; explaining them is the task of the rest of the book. Consider this discussion a preview — not the real movie, just a trailer. Actually a warning is in order because unlike any good trailer this chapter is also what film buffs call a spoiler — it gives away some of the plot early. As such it breaks the step-by-step progression of this book, especially part B, which patiently builds the case for object technology by looking at issue after issue before deducing and justifying the solutions. If you like the idea of reading a broad overview before getting into more depth, this chapter is for you. But if you prefer not to spoil the pleasure of seeing the problems unfold and of discovering the solutions one by one, then you should simply skip it. You will not need to have read it to understand subsequent chapters. 2.1 ON THE CRITERIA Let us first examine the choice of criteria for assessing objectness. How dogmatic do we need to be? The list presented below includes all the facilities which I believe to be essential for the production of quality software using the object-oriented method. It is ambitious and may appear uncompromising or even dogmatic. What conclusion does this imply for an environment which satisfies some but not all of these conditions? Should one just reject such a half-hearted O-O environment as totally inadequate? Warning : SPOILER !
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
CRITERIA FOR OBJECT ORIENTATION § 2.2 22 Only you, the reader, can answer this question relative to your own context. Several reasons suggest that some compromises may be necessary: “Object-oriented” is not a boolean condition: environment A, although not 100% O-O, may be “more” O-O than environment B; so if external constraints limit your choice to A and B you will have to pick A as the least bad object-oriented choice. Not everyone will need all of the properties all the time. Object orientation may be just one of the factors guiding your search for a software solution, so you may have to balance the criteria given here with other considerations. All this does not change the obvious: to make informed choices, even if practical
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

Page1 / 16

Chapter2 - 2 Criteria of object orientation In the previous...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 3. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online