Object-Oriented Programming and Structured Programming

I have never thought about those software engineering ideas for a long time, nor have I ever thought about rigid and hard work. It is enough to bring and combine useful tools so that they can really do a good job.

On the basis of doing well, try to extract useful things, try to improve and improve tools and methods, and strive to do better.

I just searched for the words "Object-Oriented Programming, structured programming" and other words. We still have an Inco-existent view on this idea. As a Chinese person, I feel very ashamed. Our minds have been completely Western; "Yin is Yin, Yang is Yang, Yin cannot be Yang, and Yang cannot be Yin "!

That is only one way, one way to solve the problem. If you want to walk to the destination, take a bus to the destination, and take an airplane to the destination, you can. You cannot leave me alone.

My opinion: No matter how the project is, what is ultimately to be restored is the true face of the thing. Whether it's using an object-oriented blind and blind touch, constantly dealing with the needs of basic regulations, constantly improving and restoring the original face of things, or using structured ideas and a little analysis, grasp every detail of things, lay a solid foundation after careful consideration, and build a building layer by layer to restore the original face of things.

Object-oriented is a kind of structural deformation. There is almost no difference between structured modules, object-oriented classes, and tools. No one dares to say that a module cannot have the polymorphism, inheritance, and other features of the class. The real difference is still the solution to the problem. Structured modules use object-oriented methods of doing things, which is just as good.

The structure without a trace of data is classic, and what is given to him; give you a rock, I say he is gold, and I can say that he is Bluestone. There is no trace of data, and the structure that can withstand internal and external changes is more classic. Here you are ....., I said that he is a tiger made of gold. I can say that he is a living pig.

Object-Oriented Programming and structured programming have nothing to do with. It is good to use. We should spend time improving and researching more efficient methods.

I asked a Dana student about the most basic string class features, class classes, and virtual machines. I asked him what is object-oriented, and he said, "interface", "inherit", and "Reference ". I thought it was pretty good. I thought it was okay if I didn't have a wrong idea. I said to her, "You know, 'quot' is enough. You can understand everything else by 'quot ".

(It should be very simple for Chinese to learn the object orientation, that is, the method of building shanzhai products; analyzing others' products, then piecing them together, and constantly improving them. It is easy to build a shanzhai, and it is difficult to develop products. Those who admire structural programming are or will become masters .)