Paweł Baczyński wrote:Really poor and confusing choice of names...
"Leadership is nature's way of removing morons from the productive flow" - Dogbert
Articles by Winston can be found here
Derek Nickerson wrote:
That is a point of Object Oriented Programming. You represent all things as objects.
Ok, but isn't it better (more organized) to have all the information for a contact within a single class with parameters or to use setters/getters -- as opposed to having an object for each type of information?
How should you determine whether to create a class or to do what I've done in this code by instantiating each contact?
Forgive me for being a pain...but I really want to understand all of this.
Derek Nickerson wrote:
That is a point of Object Oriented Programming. You represent all things as objects.
Ok, but isn't it better (more organized) to have all the information for a contact within a single class with parameters or to use setters/getters -- as opposed to having an object for each type of information?
How should you determine whether to create a class or to do what I've done in this code by instantiating each contact?
Forgive me for being a pain...but I really want to understand all of this.
Derek Nickerson wrote:I've been focusing on the Contact class, but don't see how this relates at all to my list.
All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable.
All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable.
All things are lawful, but not all things are profitable.
With a little knowledge, a cast iron skillet is non-stick and lasts a lifetime. |