jQuery in Action, 3rd edition
The moose likes Beginning Java and the fly likes How Object Oriented programming? Big Moose Saloon
  Search | Java FAQ | Recent Topics | Flagged Topics | Hot Topics | Zero Replies
Register / Login

Win a copy of REST with Spring (video course) this week in the Spring forum!
JavaRanch » Java Forums » Java » Beginning Java
Bookmark "How Object Oriented programming?" Watch "How Object Oriented programming?" New topic

How Object Oriented programming?

awad saleh

Joined: Jul 04, 2007
Posts: 22

How can it be said that a language is perfectly object oriented programming?
And java is not a pure object oriented programming? how ?
[ August 30, 2007: Message edited by: awad saleh ]
Roger F. Gay
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 16, 2007
Posts: 408
Some time ago, I noticed this argument raging in one of the other threads, but I don't remember which one. I think it takes a special interest to pursue it, and as I recall - some people were saying they'd been through the discussion too many times before. I'm not sure it's something for application developers to worry about. If it works, it works.

Correlation does not prove causality.
Ulf Dittmer

Joined: Mar 22, 2005
Posts: 42959
Quite right, the question has been asked many, many times before. If you search through the archives you'll find the discussions. Problem is, the question doesn't make sense unless you have a definition what a perfectly object oriented programming language is, and that if you ask n people for their definition, you probably get n+1 answers.

It's true that Java has non-object entities, namely, the primitives like int, double, etc.
Roger F. Gay
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 16, 2007
Posts: 408
Perhaps in keeping with the idea of a Java beginner's forum; Awad might tell us why he thinks that Java is not "perfectly" (or otherwise) object oriented? There might be a concrete answer to a concrete question.
[ August 30, 2007: Message edited by: Roger F. Gay ]
Roger F. Gay
Ranch Hand

Joined: Feb 16, 2007
Posts: 408
I usually don't jump into this sort of discussion. As an application developer, I'm more concerned with how a language supports what I'm trying to do than whether it's philosophically pure. But I might have tripped across a simple answer that those who are tired of the argument might find useful.

Java is one of the "object-oriented" languages. It strikes me that "perfectly object oriented" (thought came from Ulf's comment above) is perfectly nonsencical. It's not object programming (perfectly), it's merely described as oriented to objects - "object-oriented."

BTW: Integer and Double, etc. are objects. Am I mistaken that you can declare double dd and then use methods on it, like dd.floatValue()? Maybe I'm stuck too much in the JavaScript world to see what the issue is.
I agree. Here's the link: http://aspose.com/file-tools
subject: How Object Oriented programming?
It's not a secret anymore!