• Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic

How Object Oriented programming?

 
awad saleh
Greenhorn
Posts: 22
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
Hello,

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
Posts: 408
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
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.
 
Ulf Dittmer
Rancher
Posts: 42967
73
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
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
Posts: 408
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
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
Posts: 408
  • Mark post as helpful
  • send pies
  • Quote
  • Report post to moderator
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.
 
  • Post Reply
  • Bookmark Topic Watch Topic
  • New Topic