|
|
You're in the
dotnet framework
group:Object Orientated Programming Advice
dotnet framework:
One of my personal favorites for getting started was 'The object oriented thought process'. http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0672326116/qid=1112287225/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/104-7469593-5075148?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 Under $20, too. :) -- Matt Berther http://www.mattberther.com [quoted text, click to view] > Hi > > I'm not sure if I'm in the correct group but I'm after some advice on > Object Orientated Programming concepts. > > I've move from structured programming into VB.NET. I can grasp the > language syntax Ok, but I'm having a few problems with the ideas of > OOPS. > > As an exercise I am converting some of my old VB6 code into VB.NET, > trying to look at what it does and splitting it into Interface, entity > and control classes, and I can get bits to work fine, but I don't > think I'm solving the problems using an 'OOPS' methology. I keep > finding myself thinking of classes as groups of functions rather than > Objects. > > In all honesty, what I have done so far seems to be more unwieldy that > when I used sequential methods. So what I'm looking for is some good > information on the web, or good books that cover the thought processes > of OOPS, inparticular how objects interact with each other and how the > control should be sequenced. > > I hope this makes sense > > many thanks > > Andy >
Hi
I'm not sure if I'm in the correct group but I'm after some advice on Object Orientated Programming concepts. I've move from structured programming into VB.NET. I can grasp the language syntax Ok, but I'm having a few problems with the ideas of OOPS. As an exercise I am converting some of my old VB6 code into VB.NET, trying to look at what it does and splitting it into Interface, entity and control classes, and I can get bits to work fine, but I don't think I'm solving the problems using an 'OOPS' methology. I keep finding myself thinking of classes as groups of functions rather than Objects. In all honesty, what I have done so far seems to be more unwieldy that when I used sequential methods. So what I'm looking for is some good information on the web, or good books that cover the thought processes of OOPS, inparticular how objects interact with each other and how the control should be sequenced. I hope this makes sense many thanks Andy
[quoted text, click to view]
On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 15:31:56 +0100, aaj wrote: > Hi > > I'm not sure if I'm in the correct group but I'm after some advice on Object > Orientated Programming concepts. > > I've move from structured programming into VB.NET. I can grasp the language > syntax Ok, but I'm having a few problems with the ideas of OOPS. > > As an exercise I am converting some of my old VB6 code into VB.NET, trying > to look at what it does and splitting it into Interface, entity and control > classes, and I can get bits to work fine, but I don't think I'm solving the > problems using an 'OOPS' methology. I keep finding myself thinking of > classes as groups of functions rather than Objects. > > In all honesty, what I have done so far seems to be more unwieldy that when > I used sequential methods. So what I'm looking for is some good information > on the web, or good books that cover the thought processes of OOPS, > inparticular how objects interact with each other and how the control should > be sequenced. > > I hope this makes sense > > many thanks > > Andy Andy, I recommend to read "Agile Software Development - Principles, Patterns, and Practices" from Robert C. Martin. This book introduces you to object oriented software development including Design Patterns. And it shows you modern development approaches like test driven development and refactoring. Drawback: All code examples (and there are a lot) are written either in Java or C++. That doesn't matter to learn OO principles, because they are the same, in all OO languages. But you must be able to read the Java/C++/C# syntax. Agile Software Development - Principles, Patterns, and Practices Robert C. Martin Prentice Hall ISBN 0-13-597444-5 -- Claudio Grazioli
Hello aaj,
VB4 -> VB5 -> VB6 -> C#... I'm fairly new, but have really taken strides to improve my skills. I've taken it upon myself to learn other languages (Java and C++). The hardest part was understanding the concepts. Just because you have classes does *not* mean you're doing OOP. Its very easy to create a gigantic ball of mud using OOP techniques when you're not familiar with them. The key thing, in my opinion, is to start small. Don't go developing an enterprise system after reading those books. Baby steps. Secondly, there is a wealth of information on the web on how to effectively leverage the OOP principles resulting in loose coupling and high cohesion. Study as much as you can. It's a steep learning curve to get over, but once you do, the rewards are well worth it. Also, feel free to ask here if you have questions. Most people here are glad to help. -- Matt Berther http://www.mattberther.com [quoted text, click to view] > Thanks for the 2 ideas so far, Ill look at buying them today. > > How did you guys find the transition, or were you brought up with the > 'OOPS' way of thinking > > Andy > > "Matt Berther" <mberther@hotmail.com> wrote in message > news:221a09c78f32b88c703ece258a22b@news.microsoft.com... > >> Hello aaj, >> >> One of my personal favorites for getting started was 'The object >> oriented thought process'. >> >> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0672326116/qid=11122872 >> 25/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/104-7469593-5075148?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 >> >> Under $20, too. :) >> >> -- >> Matt Berther >> http://www.mattberther.com >>> Hi >>> >>> I'm not sure if I'm in the correct group but I'm after some advice >>> on Object Orientated Programming concepts. >>> >>> I've move from structured programming into VB.NET. I can grasp the >>> language syntax Ok, but I'm having a few problems with the ideas of >>> OOPS. >>> >>> As an exercise I am converting some of my old VB6 code into VB.NET, >>> trying to look at what it does and splitting it into Interface, >>> entity and control classes, and I can get bits to work fine, but I >>> don't think I'm solving the problems using an 'OOPS' methology. I >>> keep finding myself thinking of classes as groups of functions >>> rather than Objects. >>> >>> In all honesty, what I have done so far seems to be more unwieldy >>> that when I used sequential methods. So what I'm looking for is some >>> good information on the web, or good books that cover the thought >>> processes of OOPS, inparticular how objects interact with each other >>> and how the control should be sequenced. >>> >>> I hope this makes sense >>> >>> many thanks >>> >>> Andy >>>
Thanks for the 2 ideas so far, Ill look at buying them today.
How did you guys find the transition, or were you brought up with the 'OOPS' way of thinking Andy [quoted text, click to view] "Matt Berther" <mberther@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:221a09c78f32b88c703ece258a22b@news.microsoft.com... > Hello aaj, > > One of my personal favorites for getting started was 'The object oriented > thought process'. > > http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0672326116/qid=1112287225/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/104-7469593-5075148?v=glance&s=books&n=507846 > > Under $20, too. :) > > -- > Matt Berther > http://www.mattberther.com > >> Hi >> >> I'm not sure if I'm in the correct group but I'm after some advice on >> Object Orientated Programming concepts. >> >> I've move from structured programming into VB.NET. I can grasp the >> language syntax Ok, but I'm having a few problems with the ideas of >> OOPS. >> >> As an exercise I am converting some of my old VB6 code into VB.NET, >> trying to look at what it does and splitting it into Interface, entity >> and control classes, and I can get bits to work fine, but I don't >> think I'm solving the problems using an 'OOPS' methology. I keep >> finding myself thinking of classes as groups of functions rather than >> Objects. >> >> In all honesty, what I have done so far seems to be more unwieldy that >> when I used sequential methods. So what I'm looking for is some good >> information on the web, or good books that cover the thought processes >> of OOPS, inparticular how objects interact with each other and how the >> control should be sequenced. >> >> I hope this makes sense >> >> many thanks >> >> Andy >> > >
Thats it in a nut shell!!!
I'm using vb.net, but I'm sure I'm thinking about the solutions in a procedural fashion rather than as true objects. thanks again Andy [quoted text, click to view] "Claudio Grazioli" <newsgroups@gmx-ist-cool.de> wrote in message news:1eovod5ugrfk9$.1s7hx3shy5rue$.dlg@40tude.net... > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 07:43:39 +0100, aaj wrote: > >> Thanks for the 2 ideas so far, Ill look at buying them today. >> >> How did you guys find the transition, or were you brought up with the >> 'OOPS' >> way of thinking >> > > > Pascal -> C -> Ada -> C++ -> C# > 1988 1995 1996 1997 2002 > (of course, there where some others, like Assembler, VB, Java, etc.) > > It's a long way from procedural programming to "real" oo programming. OO > is > not just about knowing what a class, an interface or an object is. That's > a > complete different way of thinking. Even using classes (because you > learned > the syntax) allows you with no problem to do plane old procedural > programming. And my experience shows, that a lot of so called 'OO > programmers' exactly do that. > > So getting a real OO programmer is a long way (maybe you're a genious, of > course than it's not). > > Another interesting book for you may be: > Object Thinking > David West > Microsoft Press > ISBN 0-7356-1965-4 > > That's a book with no (or allmost no) source code in it. It's really a > book > showing you how to think object oriented. Thinking object oriented is the > base requirement to write good OO code. > > -- > Claudio Grazioli > http://www.grazioli.ch
[quoted text, click to view]
On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 07:43:39 +0100, aaj wrote: > Thanks for the 2 ideas so far, Ill look at buying them today. > > How did you guys find the transition, or were you brought up with the 'OOPS' > way of thinking > Pascal -> C -> Ada -> C++ -> C# 1988 1995 1996 1997 2002 (of course, there where some others, like Assembler, VB, Java, etc.) It's a long way from procedural programming to "real" oo programming. OO is not just about knowing what a class, an interface or an object is. That's a complete different way of thinking. Even using classes (because you learned the syntax) allows you with no problem to do plane old procedural programming. And my experience shows, that a lot of so called 'OO programmers' exactly do that. So getting a real OO programmer is a long way (maybe you're a genious, of course than it's not). Another interesting book for you may be: Object Thinking David West Microsoft Press ISBN 0-7356-1965-4 That's a book with no (or allmost no) source code in it. It's really a book showing you how to think object oriented. Thinking object oriented is the base requirement to write good OO code. -- Claudio Grazioli
Andy,
while its important to understand OOP concepts, esp. in terms of how it relates to use of NET framework and language syntax, i think its also important to realize that OOP as a goal in itself is not important. In fact depending on the type of application youre building it could be counterproductive to place too much emphasis on making your design "OOP". For example typical database-driven business applications should not, IMO, be designed to be OOP-pure. If you study best-practice and design guidelines from MSFT themselves you will see that they do not emphasize taking an OOP approach, ie. witness .NET Pet Shop vs. Java Pet Shop. They clearly promote a more data-centric approach, as opposed to worrying about creating and maintaining state for collections of Customers and Orders and OrderDetails, which is not useful except in tutorials about OOP, IMO. so my point is: dont stress out or get discouraged if something youre doing doesnt seem OOP enough! Just because youre using a OOP language doesnt mean you need to or should adhere to OOP purity. [quoted text, click to view] "aaj" wrote:
> Thats it in a nut shell!!! > > I'm using vb.net, but I'm sure I'm thinking about the solutions in a > procedural fashion rather than as true objects. > > thanks again > > Andy > > > > > > "Claudio Grazioli" <newsgroups@gmx-ist-cool.de> wrote in message > news:1eovod5ugrfk9$.1s7hx3shy5rue$.dlg@40tude.net... > > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 07:43:39 +0100, aaj wrote: > > > >> Thanks for the 2 ideas so far, Ill look at buying them today. > >> > >> How did you guys find the transition, or were you brought up with the > >> 'OOPS' > >> way of thinking > >> > > > > > > Pascal -> C -> Ada -> C++ -> C# > > 1988 1995 1996 1997 2002 > > (of course, there where some others, like Assembler, VB, Java, etc.) > > > > It's a long way from procedural programming to "real" oo programming. OO > > is > > not just about knowing what a class, an interface or an object is. That's > > a > > complete different way of thinking. Even using classes (because you > > learned > > the syntax) allows you with no problem to do plane old procedural > > programming. And my experience shows, that a lot of so called 'OO > > programmers' exactly do that. > > > > So getting a real OO programmer is a long way (maybe you're a genious, of > > course than it's not). > > > > Another interesting book for you may be: > > Object Thinking > > David West > > Microsoft Press > > ISBN 0-7356-1965-4 > > > > That's a book with no (or allmost no) source code in it. It's really a > > book > > showing you how to think object oriented. Thinking object oriented is the > > base requirement to write good OO code. > > > > -- > > Claudio Grazioli > > http://www.grazioli.ch > >
Thanks for the advice
The program I'm converting seems to be just as you describe, and I haven't been able to decide if its my lack of OOP's thinking or infact it just isn't suited to it. Its a program that reads in lots of data from a variety of text files, it then processes the raw data, performs some checks and then updates the database. Typical thoughts that run through my mind are something like whats an object, is it each of the raw text files, is it a line of raw CSV data in the text file, is it a piece of data between the commas, is it the IO handler, how do they influence each other.........????? Even though I'm finding what I'm doing long winded and complicated, I can already see benefits, I'm just waiting for the penny to drop and hopefully everything will fall into place!!! thanks again Andy [quoted text, click to view] "idi_amin" <idiamin@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message news:4CA22D8B-08D2-42E7-9DCD-857514C3380E@microsoft.com... > Andy, > while its important to understand OOP concepts, esp. in terms of how it > relates to use of NET framework and language syntax, i think its also > important to realize that OOP as a goal in itself is not important. In > fact > depending on the type of application youre building it could be > counterproductive to place too much emphasis on making your design "OOP". > For example typical database-driven business applications should not, IMO, > be > designed to be OOP-pure. If you study best-practice and design guidelines > from MSFT themselves you will see that they do not emphasize taking an OOP > approach, ie. witness .NET Pet Shop vs. Java Pet Shop. They clearly > promote > a more data-centric approach, as opposed to worrying about creating and > maintaining state for collections of Customers and Orders and > OrderDetails, > which is not useful except in tutorials about OOP, IMO. > > so my point is: dont stress out or get discouraged if something youre > doing > doesnt seem OOP enough! Just because youre using a OOP language doesnt > mean > you need to or should adhere to OOP purity. > > "aaj" wrote: > >> Thats it in a nut shell!!! >> >> I'm using vb.net, but I'm sure I'm thinking about the solutions in a >> procedural fashion rather than as true objects. >> >> thanks again >> >> Andy >> >> >> >> >> >> "Claudio Grazioli" <newsgroups@gmx-ist-cool.de> wrote in message >> news:1eovod5ugrfk9$.1s7hx3shy5rue$.dlg@40tude.net... >> > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 07:43:39 +0100, aaj wrote: >> > >> >> Thanks for the 2 ideas so far, Ill look at buying them today. >> >> >> >> How did you guys find the transition, or were you brought up with the >> >> 'OOPS' >> >> way of thinking >> >> >> > >> > >> > Pascal -> C -> Ada -> C++ -> C# >> > 1988 1995 1996 1997 2002 >> > (of course, there where some others, like Assembler, VB, Java, etc.) >> > >> > It's a long way from procedural programming to "real" oo programming. >> > OO >> > is >> > not just about knowing what a class, an interface or an object is. >> > That's >> > a >> > complete different way of thinking. Even using classes (because you >> > learned >> > the syntax) allows you with no problem to do plane old procedural >> > programming. And my experience shows, that a lot of so called 'OO >> > programmers' exactly do that. >> > >> > So getting a real OO programmer is a long way (maybe you're a genious, >> > of >> > course than it's not). >> > >> > Another interesting book for you may be: >> > Object Thinking >> > David West >> > Microsoft Press >> > ISBN 0-7356-1965-4 >> > >> > That's a book with no (or allmost no) source code in it. It's really a >> > book >> > showing you how to think object oriented. Thinking object oriented is >> > the >> > base requirement to write good OO code. >> > >> > -- >> > Claudio Grazioli >> > http://www.grazioli.ch >> >> >>
[quoted text, click to view]
On Mon, 4 Apr 2005 08:57:43 +0100, "aaj" <aaj@aaj.com> wrote: In line [quoted text, click to view] >Thanks for the advice > >The program I'm converting seems to be just as you describe, and I haven't >been able to decide if its my lack of OOP's thinking or infact it just isn't >suited to it. > >Its a program that reads in lots of data from a variety of text files, it >then processes the raw data, performs some checks and then updates the >database. > >Typical thoughts that run through my mind are something like whats an >object, is it each of the raw text files, is it a line of raw CSV data in >the text file, is it a piece of data between the commas, is it the IO >handler, how do they influence each other.........????? > >Even though I'm finding what I'm doing long winded and complicated, I can >already see benefits, I'm just waiting for the penny to drop and hopefully >everything will fall into place!!! > >thanks again > >Andy Andy, I do the same kind of stuff. I have to read a lot of text files with fixed width columns where the lines in the files have mixed layouts. The lines are flagged with "line type" markers though, so what I've done is constructed some generic objects that know how to read a line by looking at it's flags. [quoted text, click to view] > > >"idi_amin" <idiamin@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote in message >news:4CA22D8B-08D2-42E7-9DCD-857514C3380E@microsoft.com... >> Andy, >> while its important to understand OOP concepts, esp. in terms of how it >> relates to use of NET framework and language syntax, i think its also >> important to realize that OOP as a goal in itself is not important. In >> fact >> depending on the type of application youre building it could be >> counterproductive to place too much emphasis on making your design "OOP". >> For example typical database-driven business applications should not, IMO, >> be >> designed to be OOP-pure. If you study best-practice and design guidelines >> from MSFT themselves you will see that they do not emphasize taking an OOP >> approach, ie. witness .NET Pet Shop vs. Java Pet Shop. They clearly >> promote >> a more data-centric approach, as opposed to worrying about creating and >> maintaining state for collections of Customers and Orders and >> OrderDetails, >> which is not useful except in tutorials about OOP, IMO. >> >> so my point is: dont stress out or get discouraged if something youre >> doing >> doesnt seem OOP enough! Just because youre using a OOP language doesnt >> mean >> you need to or should adhere to OOP purity. >> >> "aaj" wrote: >> >>> Thats it in a nut shell!!! >>> >>> I'm using vb.net, but I'm sure I'm thinking about the solutions in a >>> procedural fashion rather than as true objects. >>> >>> thanks again >>> >>> Andy >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> "Claudio Grazioli" <newsgroups@gmx-ist-cool.de> wrote in message >>> news:1eovod5ugrfk9$.1s7hx3shy5rue$.dlg@40tude.net... >>> > On Fri, 1 Apr 2005 07:43:39 +0100, aaj wrote: >>> > >>> >> Thanks for the 2 ideas so far, Ill look at buying them today. >>> >> >>> >> How did you guys find the transition, or were you brought up with the >>> >> 'OOPS' >>> >> way of thinking >>> >> >>> > >>> > >>> > Pascal -> C -> Ada -> C++ -> C# >>> > 1988 1995 1996 1997 2002 >>> > (of course, there where some others, like Assembler, VB, Java, etc.) >>> > >>> > It's a long way from procedural programming to "real" oo programming. >>> > OO >>> > is >>> > not just about knowing what a class, an interface or an object is. >>> > That's >>> > a >>> > complete different way of thinking. Even using classes (because you >>> > learned >>> > the syntax) allows you with no problem to do plane old procedural >>> > programming. And my experience shows, that a lot of so called 'OO >>> > programmers' exactly do that. >>> > >>> > So getting a real OO programmer is a long way (maybe you're a genious, >>> > of >>> > course than it's not). >>> > >>> > Another interesting book for you may be: >>> > Object Thinking >>> > David West >>> > Microsoft Press >>> > ISBN 0-7356-1965-4 >>> > >>> > That's a book with no (or allmost no) source code in it. It's really a >>> > book >>> > showing you how to think object oriented. Thinking object oriented is >>> > the >>> > base requirement to write good OO code. >>> > >>> > -- >>> > Claudio Grazioli >>> > http://www.grazioli.ch >>> >>> >>> > Otis Mukinfus
Don't see what you're looking for? Try a search.
|
June 2003
July 2003
August 2003
September 2003
October 2003
November 2003
December 2003
January 2004
February 2004
March 2004
April 2004
May 2004
June 2004
July 2004
August 2004
September 2004
October 2004
November 2004
December 2004
January 2005
February 2005
March 2005
April 2005
May 2005
June 2005
July 2005
August 2005
September 2005
October 2005
November 2005
December 2005
January 2006
February 2006
March 2006
April 2006
May 2006
June 2006
July 2006
August 2006
September 2006
October 2006
November 2006
December 2006
January 2007
February 2007
March 2007
April 2007
May 2007
June 2007
July 2007
August 2007
September 2007
October 2007
November 2007
December 2007
January 2008
February 2008
March 2008
April 2008
May 2008
June 2008
| home · blog · groups | Questions? Comments? Contact the dn |