[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Discussion on global variables in IDL
email@example.com (Altyntsev Dmitriy) wrote in message news:<firstname.lastname@example.org>...
> So, what is the most annoying thing with IDL OOP for me? The fact that
> when I describe class I loose freedom of changing field type and size.
> I can not have undefined field in class too. And I can not add field
> during execution. Let us view very simple typical example.
> Altyntsev Dmitriy
OOP is for ``high level'' programming. In my (not that vast)
experience you don't write an OOP application by sitting in front of
the terminal. You think, specify, and _plan_ the application. Then
you type it in.
BTW, I ``discovered'' a gorgeous book on OOP called Design Patterns.
I don't have the author names, but you can find it easily enough on
amazon.com. It was an eye-opener for me on making re-usable object
If I had a top ten wish, it would be to make IDL a more OO language,
implementing all of the basic OO features and some of the more
advanced OO features, including operator overloading. Note that this
is a dangereous wish, as highly obtuse and non-transparent code can be
result from a mis-use of those tools.
But other wishes of your list are appealing too.