Talk:Abstraction in object-oriented programming

There is a vast array of obsolete crap out there regarding programming languages and especially how the so-called "abstraction" in OOP is supposed to relate to the real world's relationships. 99.999% of this is garbage, and bears no relation to prototype theory in perceptual and cognitive psychology as it is understood today, e.g. most descriptions of "finding the objects", e.g. most descriptions of "domain analysis", make bizarre ontological assumptions.

Whatever is said in this encyclopedia about OOP, and I hope it's not much, ought to respect the m:Governing Operational distinctions made at run time by all computer programs in execution... we should make no claim for an abstraction to actually represent more than the operation distinctions that it includes. See essay "Class Names Considered Dangerous" by I forget who... or "The Cruelty of Really Teaching Computer Science" by Dykstra. Someone who doesn't understand why m:Governing Operational distinctions (as made by the pigs, cows, commodity markets and computer processor) are not the same as the m:Governing Ontological distinctions (as made by the farmer, programmer, and consumer) hasn't understood "doing" versus "seeing" yet, and should be kept away from all computers. This article wsa on the edge of that madness, but it was pulled back slightly, and I think we should make this as good as we can before creating a vast array of crap files laying out some Java-specific terminology from someone who hasn't been doing this for 15 years in 6 languages in all types of work environments..

Comments?