Ed Lazor wrote:
On Oct 12, 2006, at 10:18 AM, Richard Lynch wrote:
I can't architect a good OOP solution to a problem that hasn't been
fully defined, any more than one can architect a house without knowing
all the rooms that are needed...
Sorry to jump into the middle of the conversation, but I thought this
was a pretty interesting comment. It serves as one of those occasional
reminders that I need to go back and study OOP structure design a bit
more. I know you're right about the importance of a fully defined
problem, but it also seems that the reverse is true if you're really
good with OOP. In other words, it seems like any high quality solution
starts by defining least common denominators. You start with basic
building blocks and expand from there; I'm always amazed when I see
space stations or other complex structures built out of Legos, for
example. My problem is that I usually look at OOP and think it'll take
too long, so I go the non-OOP route, solve the problem, and move on. I
can't help but think I'm missing out. I do have libraries of code that
I reuse, but I've always heard that I'd benefit a lot more from them if
I OOPed them. Dunno... that's my two cents worth anyway hehe
Except that is the attitude that leads to painful OOP in PHP. PHP is not
the same environment as C++. The environment (classes, objects, etc)
needs to be created and destroyed with each request. As such you cannot
start designing a solution unless you know how the data/entities are
going to be used. OOP in PHP cannot start with basic building blocks, at
least not if you want a system that performs reasonably well.
-Stut
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
