Anyone else growing tired of OO?

**DimPrawn** · 29 May 2009, 09:42

Your problem is writing large monolithic applications.

If you break up the application into loosely coupled reusable components communicating via messages rather than manipulaing large complex objects, debugging and testing becomes simpler.

Giant OO apps are a no no.

Look up SOA. Simpler components/services built on OO principles aggregated into larger application via message exchange.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service...d_architecture

No one piece of the pie becomes overly complex.

**xchaotic** · 29 May 2009, 09:44

Originally posted by Shimano105 View Post

I think that one of the major downsides of its success has been the proliferation of frameworks on top of frameworks and the endless indirection.

There's a new product, Kodiak, for abstracting VM farms management, and when I first saw it, I though about the process the poor request for a page has to go trough:
1. load balancer to a node that run a vm 2. managed by kodiak, but 3.
running esx (linux) in which actual 4. vm is running, in which a 5.
virtual OS is running (let's say linux again) in which 6. (L)AMP is
running, possibly via 7. memcached, and the query is a 8. RESTful
wrapper, for a 9. PHP Query in 10. PEAR abstraction, for 11. SQL
Database, which is stored on a 12. SAN, running 13. 14. pool of disk
nodes with 15. virtual filesystem such as ZFS, mapping to virtual 16.
clusters expesed by HDD, which indirectly relate to storage 17. units
on a HDD or SSD, mapped as bunch of 0 and 1 electrical, optical or
magnetical states.

That is a lot of indirection and it can go wrong in each step, but do you want to account for different types of storage media when you write a simple webpage?

And if you're just tired of OO, try functional programming (Erlang, Haskell) it's beautiful once you get some ideas, a step in this direction is XSL, which I use quite often, and is declarative by nature.
But essentially is a step up in the abstraction ladder, not closer to hardware like old programs were, so it might not suit you too well...

**minestrone** · 30 May 2009, 17:15

Originally posted by DimPrawn View Post

Your problem is writing large monolithic applications.

If you break up the application into loosely coupled reusable components communicating via messages rather than manipulaing large complex objects, debugging and testing becomes simpler.

Giant OO apps are a no no.

Look up SOA. Simpler components/services built on OO principles aggregated into larger application via message exchange.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service...d_architecture

No one piece of the pie becomes overly complex.

You have just proven the point the OP makes, you suggest SOA when it is possible that he could be programming games for mobile phones, I don't know and you don't know what he is writing but SOA is what he should be looking at by your definition.

"To hell with just writing some good code, OO and SOA will see you right"

**Shimano105** · 30 May 2009, 17:49

Yeah, sometimes I feel that too much design can be a bad thing. Just get hacking and eventually it will become organised into something inteligible!

**minestrone** · 31 May 2009, 14:18

The development industry is worse than the fashion industry for following trends, ideas start off well meaning then millions jump on the bandwagon and turn the latest style into a religion. Tossers like Martin Fowler and Kent Beck are the problem in this, they sell a vision of easy development which half brained failed developers turned managers lap up.

In my last gig I sat beside the companies 'agile mentor' who had, pinned to his desk wall the tenants of OO. Stuff like "don't call me, we will call you" which you get in your first software lecture at University. Obvioulsy never written a decent bit of code in his life.

People cling to these movements like children cling to safety blankets. "If I keep hold of this all will be OK"

Give me an old hacker over a software fashion victim any day of the week.

**DimPrawn** · 1 June 2009, 08:20

Originally posted by minestrone View Post

You have just proven the point the OP makes, you suggest SOA when it is possible that he could be programming games for mobile phones, I don't know and you don't know what he is writing but SOA is what he should be looking at by your definition.

"To hell with just writing some good code, OO and SOA will see you right"

I know it would be difficult to imagine a world without OO these days, but I think that one of the major downsides of its success has been the proliferation of frameworks on top of frameworks and the endless indirection. Design patterns on Application Blocks on .NET frameworks configured by XML files etc., all to do simple things but all the time having reuse and extensibility in mind. Violates the YAGNI principle as well (if you follow the latest XP fads).

Yeah, that sounds like game development on a mobile device.

Stick to hacking code in a dark room.

**Sysman** · 1 June 2009, 11:31

Originally posted by minestrone View Post

Give me an old hacker over a software fashion victim any day of the week.

The story of Mel

**zeitghost** · 1 June 2009, 12:31

Originally posted by zeitghost

A True Hero...

And here's the manual for the RPC-4000...

http://www.textfiles.com/bitsavers/p...4000PgmMan.pdf

Enjoy...

Feck me, it was 32 bit....

http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/real.programmers.html

Will also have this on the wall...

http://www.users.on.net/~farnik/wiki...SnoopyCalendar

Now where did I put that FORTRAN compiler?

**Churchill** · 1 June 2009, 12:31

Originally posted by zeitghost

A True Hero...

And here's the manual for the RPC-4000...

http://www.textfiles.com/bitsavers/p...4000PgmMan.pdf

Enjoy...

Is there an emulator available?

Anyone else growing tired of OO?