When is Object Oriented not the correct solution? [closed]

Answer 1

One that easily comes to mind... Database-y web applications.
In such a scenario, it makes more sense to conform to an accepted framework.. rather than eek out a nice OOP design. e.g. if you have to do some kind of complex query with JOIN and ORDER BYs .. SQL will kick object butt.

Choose the solution based on the problem... instead of hammering the problem till it fits a solution.

Answer 2

I would sudgest you visit wikipedia and read their articles about different types of programming languages.

Saying that a type of programming "isn't good enough" doesn't make any sense. Each type has a purpose. You can't compare them. They're not made to do the same thing.

Answer 3

I wouldn't bother with OOP if the programming language that you are using doesn't easily allow you to use OOP. We use a BDL at my workplace that is made to be procedural. I once tried to do some OOP, and well, that was just a big oops. Shouldn't have bothered.

Answer 4

Object Oriented programming is good solution if you make good design.

Answer 5

Cross-cutting concerns benefit from Aspect Oriented Programming (AOP). By cross-cutting, I mean functionality that could benefit various parts of the application and that really do not belong to a particular object. Logging is usually given as an example. Security could be another. For example, why should a Person object know anything about logging or who should be allowed access to it?

Answer 6

Not good enough? I don't know if I can come up with an example of that, but I do know that some REALLY simple applications might not see any "benefits" in the beginning of using a fully object oriented design model. If it is something truly procedural and trivial, however, in the end, it might need to be re-visited.