Object-oriented programming: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 04:13, 29 July 2025

Revision as of 04:16, 29 July 2025

Line 298:

==Formal semantics==

Researchers have tried to formally define the [[Semantics (computer science)|semantics]] of OOP. [[Inheritance (object-oriented programming)|inheritance]] presents difficulties, particularly with the interactions between open recursion and encapsulated state. Researchers have used [[recursive type]]s and [[F-Coalgebra|co-algebraic data types]] to incorporate essential features of OOP.<ref name=poll97>{{cite web|last=Poll|first=Erik|title=Subtyping and Inheritance for Categorical Datatypes|url=https://www.cs.ru.nl/E.Poll/papers/kyoto97.pdf|access-date=5 June 2011}}</ref> Abadi and Cardelli defined several extensions of [[System F-sub|System F_<:]] that deal with mutable objects, allowing both [[subtype polymorphism]] and [[parametric polymorphism]] (generics), and were able to formally model many OOP concepts and constructs.<ref name="AbadiCardelli">{{Cite book| first=Martin| last=Abadi |title=A Theory of Objects| url=http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=547964&dl=ACM&coll=portal| year=1996| access-date=21 April 2010| isbn = 978-0-387-94775-4| publisher = Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.| author-link=Martin Abadi|author2=Cardelli, Luca }}</ref> Although far from trivial, static analysis of object-oriented programming languages such as Java is a mature field,<ref>{{cite conference |last1=Tan |first1=Tian |last2=Li |first2=Yue |title=Tai-e: A Developer-Friendly Static Analysis Framework for Java by Harnessing the Good Designs of Classics|conference=ISSTA 2023 |date=12 July 2023 |pages=1093–1105 |doi=10.1145/3597926.3598120}}</ref> with several commercial tools.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bhutani |first1=Vikram |last2=Toosi |first2=Farshad Ghassemi |last3=Buckley |first3=Jim |title=Analysing the Analysers: An Investigation of Source Code Analysis Tools |journal=Applied Computer Systems |date=1 June 2024 |volume=29 |issue=1 |pages=98–111 |doi=10.2478/acss-2024-0013}}</ref>

==Criticism==

Some believe that OOP places too much focus on using objects rather than on [[algorithm]]s and [[data structure]]s.<ref name="stepanov"/><ref name="hickey"/> For example, programmer [[Rob Pike]] pointed out that OOP can make programmers think more about type hierarchy than composition.<ref name="RobPike">{{cite web |url=https://commandcenter.blogspot.com/2012/06/less-is-exponentially-more.html |title=Less is exponentially more |last1=Pike |first1=Rob |date=25 June 2012 |access-date=1 October 2016 }}</ref> He has called OOP "the [[Roman numerals]] of computing".<ref>{{cite mailing list |last1=Pike |first1=Rob |author1-link=Rob Pike |date=2 March 2004 |url=http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.plan9/msg/006fec195aeeff15 |title=[9fans] Re: Threads: Sewing badges of honor onto a Kernel |access-date=17 November 2016 |mailing-list=comp.os.plan9}}</ref> [[Rich Hickey]], creator of [[Clojure]], described OOP as overly simplistic, especially when it comes to representing real-world things that change over time.<ref name="hickey">Rich Hickey, JVM Languages Summit 2009 keynote, [http://www.infoq.com/presentations/Are-We-There-Yet-Rich-Hickey Are We There Yet?] November 2009.</ref> [[Alexander Stepanov]] said that OOP tries to fit everything into a single type, which can be limiting. He argued that sometimes we need multisorted algebras—families of interfaces that span multiple types, such as in [[generic programming]]. Stepanov also said that calling everything an "object" doesn't add much understanding.<ref name="stepanov">{{Cite web| url=http://www.stlport.org/resources/StepanovUSA.html| title=STLport: An Interview with A. Stepanov| last=Stepanov| first=Alexander| access-date=21 April 2010| author-link=Alexander Stepanov}}</ref>

OOP was created to make code easier to [[code reuse|reuse]] and [[software maintenance|maintain]].<ref name="realisticcodereuse">{{Cite web| first = Scott| last= Ambler| title = A Realistic Look at Object-Oriented Reuse| date=1 January 1998| access-date=4 July 2010| publisher = drdobbs.com| url=http://www.drdobbs.com/184415594}}</ref> However, it was not designed to clearly show the flow of a program's instructions—that was left to the compiler. As computers began using more parallel processing and multiple [[thread (computer science)|threads]], it became more important to understand and control how instructions flow. This is difficult to do with OOP.<ref name="flaws">{{Cite web| first = Asaf| last= Shelly |title = Flaws of Object Oriented Modeling| date=22 August 2008|access-date=4 July 2010| publisher = Intel Software Network| url=http://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2008/08/22/flaws-of-object-oriented-modeling/}}</ref><ref name="multithreadingisaverb">{{Cite web| first = Justin| last = James| title = Multithreading is a verb not a noun| date = 1 October 2007| access-date = 4 July 2010| publisher = techrepublic.com| url = http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/programming-and-development/?p=518| archive-url = https://web.archive.org/web/20071010105117/http://blogs.techrepublic.com.com/programming-and-development/?p=518| archive-date = 10 October 2007| url-status = dead| df = dmy-all}}</ref><ref name="multicore">{{Cite web| first = Asaf| last= Shelly| title = HOW TO: Multicore Programming (Multiprocessing) Visual C++ Class Design Guidelines, Member Functions| date=22 August 2008| access-date=4 July 2010| publisher = support.microsoft.com| url=http://support.microsoft.com/?scid=kb%3Ben-us%3B558117}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://existentialtype.wordpress.com/2011/04/17/some-advice-on-teaching-fp/|title=Some thoughts on teaching FP|author=Robert Harper |publisher=Existential Type Blog|access-date=5 December 2011|date=17 April 2011|author-link=Robert Harper (computer scientist)}}</ref>

==See also==