Jump to content

Talk:Object-oriented design

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Astronautb (talk | contribs) at 01:04, 5 March 2008 (moved Talk:Object-oriented design to Talk:41-oriented design). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Object Orientated Design (OOD) is the second stage in the object orientated software development cycle, the first stage being object orientated analysis(OOA), and the third being object orientated programming(OOP). Usually these are parts of a larger development cycle.
In essence object orientated design is to emphasize a problem from the perspective of objects, this is represented using UML.
OOD is used to expand on the outputs from Analysis to the level where programming can commence.

    The outputs from OOD include:
  • Prose Document
  • Class Diagram
  • Object Diagram
  • Interaction Diagram (either Collaboration or Sequence, although sequence is most common)
  • Statechart andA Activity Diagram's
  • Formulae and algorithms



oOO

Is "oOO" in the lead sentence a typo? If not, it should be explained/linked. In any case, I don't like the use of the abbreviation so early in the article. Gmarsden 18:36, 13 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ActionScript

I have serious reservations about ActionScript being listed as a current OOP. It seems to be in no sense a general-purpose programming language, but more of a scripting wrapper that allows access to the Flash object model. It's not clear that anything can be done with it in the absence of Flash, so it seems hardly any more of an OOP than does the the MS-Word macro language. I'd like to see some justification for considering ActionScript to be an an OOP. --Malleus Fatuarum 18:26, 14 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a disgrace

I could hardly believe my eyes when I saw the rubbish written in his article. Does nobody else know anything about OOD apart from me? Does nobody else want to get this article at least out of the risible state? --Malleus Fatuarum 03:38, 7 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]