[AccessD] Access and OOP

[John Colby]

And yes I fully understand that Access doesn't have inheritance and
polymorphism.  So what?

"I'm not going to use this saw because the handle is made of wood"?  I only
use saws with gold plated handles.

LOL.  A tool is what it is.  Access has classes. Access classes fully
implement the first two properties of OO, abstraction (black box) and
encapsulation. Again I am amused that you bitch about the class not having
inheritance, and won't use it and yet merrily use forms (which is an object
you can't inherit), reports, all the controls, the entire damned DAO
library, all of which are objects which you cannot inherit.

Get over yourself.

Classes exist, they are extremely useful, and they provide programming
abilities without which you are literally hamstrung.  YOU are stringing
your hams my friend.  I merrily use the tool however it allows me to use
it.  And yes, I call it Object ORIENTED programming.  Classes are objects.
They model real world things.

I can do things in Access that you cannot even imagine, not because I am
all that, but because of your lack of imagination.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Object-oriented_programming

On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 1:07 PM John Colby <jwcolby at gmail.com> wrote:

> So learn any modern language.  Python, Java, C++, Ruby.  Come back and
> tell me OOP is dying.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 1:05 PM John Colby <jwcolby at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The second word in OOP is ORIENTED.
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 2, 2020 at 12:53 PM Arthur Fuller <fuller.artful at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> John,
>>>
>>> Access is nof OOP. It is close but fails on a few significant aspects. I
>>> cannot create a class and then inherit from it. I cannot do polymorphism
>>> without a bunch of VBA code that points to the pseudo-class I created.
>>> More to the point, OOP is pretty much a dying creed of code. Originally
>>> it
>>> sounded like a great idea, then turned out to be a rhinocus with only two
>>> feet -- in other words, a very awkward beast.
>>> Initally I was seduced by the claims of Bertrand Meyer et. al., but that
>>> is
>>> no longer the case. I still think in OOP, but Access is simply not an OOP
>>> language. I would call it Not Oop, but kist an Object-Based Language. I
>>> suppose this is merely a matter of terminology, but since you know more
>>> than a little about VC and C++, you surely must understand the
>>> difference.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 7:53 AM John Colby <jwcolby at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> > It is 2020.  OOP has been around for a long time and Access is, top to
>>> > bottom oop.  So...
>>> >
>>> > If you were to interview with the mythical organization C2Db for an
>>> Access
>>> > position, I would ask you:
>>> > 1) Do you understand OOP?
>>> > Yes.  The only acceptable answer in 2020.
>>> > 2) What is a class? A code construct that allows you to model a real
>>> world
>>> > object, storing code and variables (and events) for that object.
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > John W. Colby
>>> > Colby Consulting
>>> > --
>>> > AccessD mailing list
>>> > AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>>> > http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>>> > Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Arthur
>>> --
>>> AccessD mailing list
>>> AccessD at databaseadvisors.com
>>> http://databaseadvisors.com/mailman/listinfo/accessd
>>> Website: http://www.databaseadvisors.com
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> John W. Colby
>> Colby Consulting
>>
>
>
> --
> John W. Colby
> Colby Consulting
>


-- 
John W. Colby
Colby Consulting