Re: OOP - a question about database access

"Topmind" <topmind_at_technologist.com> wrote in message news:4e705869.0311082320.466aefd2_at_posting.google.com...
> > No. Just a matter that the greatest benefit of OO is not
"quantitative"
> > or "metrical", but "qualitative" and "cognitive". Much harder to
create
> > empirical proof. But there are studies where for the same context
that
> > the average project posses, OO proved itself superior. See
Caper-Jones
> > for one set.

> The Caper-Jones study is flawed and speculative.

How is the Caper Jones experiment "flawed" and "speculative"?

For the same requirements, on the one hand the structured abstraction paradigm plus a 3GL (3rd Generation Language) like COBOL, Pascal, VB etc was used and on the other the OO abstraction paradigm and an OOPL, C++ and or Smalltalk I think were used. The outcome was time, space and money saved for the OO effort.

Not agreeing with the result doesn't invalidate the experiment. :- }

> Besides, if you take
> that silly study at face value, then SQL and/or MS-Excel is just as
> good as Smalltalk.

Please explain.

> 13+ years of OO being a "mainstream" technology, and the
> best imperical evidence you have is Caper-Jones? I think
> you should stick with the "its more intuitive" claim, because
> that is hard to measure, and reflects my working theory
> that OO simply maps to some people's heads better
> (but not all).

You will *never* get OO until and unless you understand that OO's main advantage is based upon its ability to reduce complexity in human cognition. Yes not all see it, but the overwhelming number of the more competent sw engineers and their clients do see it. And we leverage OO's ability to reduce the cognitive load to reduce, significantly in many cases the time, space and costs of sw development when compared to using Structured plus 3GLs.

That's it. No formal grammars to be unfolded as proof, no doozys of mathematical formulae. Either one apprehends the reduction in complexity OO proffers and uses that to advantage or you are stuck with a generally inferior cognitive model and the tools apropos to that model.

You get or you don't. I would reappraise the nature and direction of my whole mental conceptual framework if I didn't get it, but hey whatever floats your boat. Your loss not" OOurs". :- }

Elliott

-- 
Be bold, be artistically imaginative, yet scientifically grounded -- DO
GREAT  OO  MODELLING  WITH  OBJECTS  OF  ALL  TYPES!!