wij wrote:
https://sourceforge.net/projects/cscall/files/MisFiles/ClassGuidelines.txt/download
... OO can have many meaning. I took the object to mean the basic entity of the
programming model. The concept of object, as a foundmental concept, has to be solid, practical and easily usable. Otherwise, more codes and efforts will be needed latter to fix it making the original goal, practically, a lie.
IOW, (nearly) a flawless model is all the basics...
After 25 years, I feel the idea of OO is lost. Something not right with OO? I'd rather believe the idea of OO being not followed or addressed is the culprit.
its lost from the begining...same as so called polymorphism etc
the problem in opp is those pointers you make and carry (pas in and out)
the right idea i call "hipermodularity" or "miclomodularity" and i wrote
a lot on this mainly on c.l.c
here if you have a
module Smth
{
int x,y;
int foo() {}
int goo() {}
}
its just liek structure but it als has code in it
the instances are visible right away just like in normal structures,
you also can pout it in array
Smth table[10]
and so on (by so on i mean like definig operators also)
simply no new and no pointer passing..there is more to it but
its a longer stream of insights and details
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)