OOP vs procedural programming - page 42

[Rashid Umarov]

Can we get a brief retelling of the last 20 pages of the thread? Who is winning?

[Vladimir Karputov]

Rashid Umarov:

Can we get a brief retelling of the last 20 pages of the thread? Who wins?

No one, as there are essentially no participants. Everyone is left with their own opinions.

[TheXpert]

Rashid Umarov:

Can we get a brief retelling of the last 20 pages of the thread? Who is winning?

Proceduralists by a huge margin. All the arguments of the GOP are shattered by the ironclad "so what?" and "I'm fine".

[Vasiliy Sokolov]

СанСаныч Фоменко:

You're the one who came up with it - I'm not suggesting it.

From my practice.

• The ToR is a document of well over 400 pages. The ToR is reviewed and approved
• Then the technical project. This document was prepared by 40 to 50 people. By profession, they are: economists of different specialties, mathematicians, algorithms makers, sysadmins in the current terminology, electronics engineers.
• Then the working draft. This is where the breakdown of programs and functions appears. The actual coding and debugging is done. Documentation is created: for developer, different users in the CPU, different application users (management, middle management, dispatchers...).
• Further there is a trial operation. The main indicator is mean time between failures. If everything is properly done, documented, the principle of primitive coding is taken into account, the time between failures after the next catching of errors should decrease exponentially. If it is linear, it will most likely NEVER work at all.

Where is the OOP here? OOP is some corporate requirement during development. and it has little effect on the final result, but it can be very useful (so it seems to me), if one person is found and develops all the classes for the whole project, will not mix up anything, the classes will be natural from the final goal of the project....

Your practice is outdated. And you are entrenched in your documentation, TOR and other dreary design systems. Agile development methodologies are in use now. Do words like Agile, XP mean anything to you? I think not. Here's an interview with an interesting man. He's about your age, but how he thinks and what a non-trivial life experience.

[Alexey Oreshkin]

By the way, everyone's arguing etc., why doesn't anyone give simple life examples ?...although maybe I just missed it, the topic is growing very fast.

For example, let's take a frequently repeated single-type action: show/hide certain symbols in a market overview (only forex or only metals, etc.).
For these actions, you can write your own functions, and there will be a dozen or more. Further, if they have to be connected to the robot, then firstly, we have to remember all their names, and secondly, we have to connect them all one by one. If they're formatted as a class, we don't have to remember all their names, we just connect them all together in one line. Not only is it faster and more convenient, but intellisense will also work. It's worth using OOP just for the sake of it alone, it's really convenient.

Also, if we consider function overloading. Is it possible without OOP? and millions of other things.

[Реter Konow]

Alexey Oreshkin:

By the way, everyone's arguing etc., why doesn't anyone give simple life examples ?...although maybe I just missed it, the topic is growing very fast.

For example, let's take a frequently repeated single-type action: show/hide certain symbols in a market overview (only forex or only metals, etc.).
For these actions, you can write your own functions, and there will be a dozen or more. Further, if they have to be connected to the robot, then firstly, we have to remember all their names, and secondly, we have to connect them all one by one. If they're formatted as a class, we don't have to remember all their names, we just connect them all together in one line. Not only is it faster and more convenient, but intellisense will also work. It's worth using OOP just for the sake of it alone, it's really convenient.

Also, if we consider function overloading. Is it possible to use it without OOP? and millions of other things.

Well, a concrete example with functions is not very correct. After all, you can stuff multiple function calls into one wrapper function.

[Dmitry Fedoseev]

Реter Konow:
Well, the particular example with functions is not very correct. After all, you can stuff multiple function calls into one wrapper function.

For you, all the examples are not correct.

[Реter Konow]

Dmitry Fedoseev:

For you, all the examples are not correct.

Not true. The example about overloading is correct. It doesn't exist without OOP. Though it seems to be there too...

[Alexey Oreshkin]

Реter Konow:
Well, a concrete example with functions is not very correct. After all, you can shove calls of multiple functions into one wrapper function.

intellisence will not work, which imposes on the developer the need to either remember all functions by heart with all parameters (which of course is nonsense), or constantly run through the files and look at their descriptions.

[Dmitry Fedoseev]

A static variable in a function. If the function will be called from different places with different parameters, then for each place and set of parameters we have to make a copy of the function - purely stupid copying - but this is idiotic. With OOP, an object is created, as many objects as needed.