I'm back to trying to figure out the whole OOP thing. Somehow I get the feeling that there is more to it than what I can see on the surface, but my general opinion is still in the "so what" category.
For example, Bob's comment in the opening "OOP" discussion:
Why would these functions be better off as objects rather than the traditional FUNCTION? There must be a real-world value to writing these things as objects, but I can't see what that value is.
I'm hoping someone can shed some light on this for me. Perhaps then, the overall value of OOP may make more sense to me.
For example, Bob's comment in the opening "OOP" discussion:
For example, a string array containing names and addresses (data) might be packaged with a subroutine (code) that displays a popup dialog to edit the data, another subroutine (code) to print mailing labels, and so forth. That's a great candidate for an object.
I'm hoping someone can shed some light on this for me. Perhaps then, the overall value of OOP may make more sense to me.
Comment