🚀 go-pugleaf

Dellis Hines (dellish@datalytics.com) wrote:
: Ell wrote:
: > Kazimir Kylheku (c2a192@ugrad.cs.ubc.ca) wrote:
: >:I don't particularly subscribe to the view
: >:that there ought to be a naive correspondence between software entities and
: >:some ``real world'' entities, except when it's utterly convenient, and on
: >:the third Wednesday of every month.
:
: >:The whole thing is a little childish and naive when taken too far.

: > You know what is a real crime is the time and money wasted by those who
: > ignore and downplay OOA.

: I believe that you should go back and read the post you're replying to, 
: where the writer clearly 
: states 'when taken TOO far'.  

But before that the writer says there shouldn't be "naive correspondence
between software entites and some ``real world'' entites, except when it's
utterly convenient...".  I don't know what the writer means by naive, but
I ADAMANTLY DISAGREE that there shouldn't be a correspondence between the
real world of the applciation area and the central model classes.  As
Rumbaugh says, the analysis model should project through the other layers
of the design (March/April '96 JOOP).

Elliott