3 ms·

> In reality we are never designing classes for a bookstore, shapes, or a animals. This 100x. Anyone who has tried to solve real world problems finds out a ver

> In reality we are never designing classes for a bookstore, shapes, or a animals. This 100x. Anyone who has tried to solve real world problems finds out a very small amount of code written fits the model where a class corresponds to a family of physical objects, and probably much less even fits the model of polymorphism. 95% of classes end up just being fairly random containers for data and behaviour and OO just does not offer anything of value.

Kiro 11y ago
> 95% of classes end up just being fairly random containers for data and behaviour and OO just does not offer anything of value. Thank you. I always feel I'm doing something wrong since my OO code always ends up like this.
JustSomeNobody 11y ago
That's OK. As long as you're constantly refactoring. If you step back and look at how you're manipulating your data and you're like, "Ok, data comes in and I first turn it right, then I turn it left, then I flip it over... Ah! I might be able to use Pipes and Filters here!" You can then refactor your classes to be more organized.