Is OOP abused in universities? [closed]

Answer 1

The professors have the disadvantage that they can't put you on huge, nasty programs that go on for years, being worked on by many different programmers. They have to use rather unconvincing toy examples and try to trick you into seeing the bigger picture.

Essentially, they have to scare you into believing that when an HO gauge model train hits you, it'll tear your leg clean off. Only the most convincing profs can do it.

---

"If the solution goes well with the project, I believe it should be the right one also with the macro-version of that project."

That's where I disagree. A small project fits into your brain. The large version of it might not. To me, the benefit of OO is hiding enough of the details so that the big picture can still be crammed into my head. If you lack OO, you can still manage, but it means finding other ways to hide the complexity.

Keep your eye on the real goal--producing reliable code. OO works well in large programs because it helps you manage complexity. It also can aid in reusability.

But OO isn't the goal. Good code is the goal. If a procedural approach works and never gets complex, you win!

Answer 2

I've seen some of the best results of using OOP when adding new functionality to a system or maintaining/improving a system. Unfortunately, it's not easy to get that kind of experience while attending a university.

Answer 3

Is OOP the right approach always?

Nope.

When OOP is the best approach?

When it helps you.

When OOP is a bad approach?

When it impedes you.

That's really as specific as it gets. Sometimes you don't need OOP, sometimes it's not available in the language you're using, sometimes it really doesn't make a difference.

I will say this though, when it comes to technique and best practices continue to double check what your professors tell you. Just because they're teachers doesn't mean they're experts.

Answer 4

1. OOP is not always the best approach. However it is the best approach in the majority of applications.
2. OOP is the best approach in any system that lend itself to objects and the interaction of objects. Most business applications are best implemented in an object-oriented way.
3. OOP is a bad approach for small 1 off applications where the cost of developing an framework of objects would exceed the needs of the moment.

Learning OOA, OOD & OOP skills will benefit the most programmers, so it is definately useful for Universities to teach it.

Answer 5

The title asks one question, and the post asks another. What do you want to know?

OOP is a major paradigm, and it gets major attention. If metaprogramming becomes huge, it will get more attention. Java and C# are two of the most used languages at the moment (see: SO tags by number of uses). I think it's ignorant to state either way that OOP is a great/terrible paradigm.

I think your question can best be summarized by the old adage: "When the hammer is your tool, everything looks like a nail."

Answer 6

1. No...OOP is not always the best approach.

2. (A true) OOP design is the best approach when your problem can best be modeled as a set of objects that can accomplish your goals by communicating/using one another.

3. Good question...but I'm guessing Scientific/Analytic applications are probably the best example. The majority of their problems can best be approached by functional programming rather than object oriented programming.

...that being said, let the flaming begin. I'm sure there are holes and I'd love to learn why.