Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PO
    text
    copied!<p>you've asked an interesting question.</p> <p>I'll rephrase it: Why Object Oriented? And why .NET? And when not?</p> <p>I suppose the thing to keep in mind is why OO is so popular. In the modern world, much of the demand for programs is essentially for business. This is why object oriented paradigms are so popular; it is often the most straightforward way to turn a business problem into a program. You basically take a look at a business, break down what the interacting parts (people, machines, places, etc) are, and write something that mimics it in code. So OO is popular because it allows you to mimic many real world situations.</p> <p>.NET I suspect is popular because it seems so comprehensive. You get loads of components with it, and all you're really doing is mimicking a business issue by writing some connective tissue between these components. Add to that the fact that there's a huge community of people using it already, and the network effect speaks in .NETs favour.</p> <p>Finally, when would you NOT use .NET?</p> <p>If your problem is not a business problem, ie isn't merely an issue of connecting some premade components, you might need something different. For instance, if you're writing a driver for a new piece of hardware, that driver is really a layer below the business layer, because</p> <p>1) It needs to work regardless of what the composition of components is used for 2) The business layer doesn't really care how it works</p> <p>There's plenty of programming problems where you wouldn't use an OO model, but I suspect OO is useful because it connects all the parts (which aren't OO, like databases and drivers) to create a whole.</p>
 

Querying!

 
Guidance

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload