Dictionary of Meaning
<<Back
Please select a letter:
A |
B |
C |
D |
E |
F |
G |
H |
I |
J |
K |
L |
M |
N |
O |
P |
Q |
R |
S |
T |
U |
V |
W |
X |
Y |
Z |
0-9
Click here for Shopping
Object-Oriented programming
*** Shopping-Tip: Object-Oriented programming
In
computer science, '''object-oriented programming''', '''OOP''' for short, is a computer
programming paradigm.
The idea behind object-oriented programming is that a computer program may be seen as comprising a collection of individual units, or ''objects'', that act on each other, as opposed to a traditional view in which a program may be seen as a collection of
subroutine functions or
procedures, or simply as a list of
instructions to the computer. Each object is capable of receiving
message (computer science) messages, processing data, and sending messages to other objects.
Object-oriented programming is claimed to promote greater flexibility and
maintainability in programming, and is widely popular in large-scale
software engineering. Furthermore, proponents of OOP claim that OOP is easier to learn for those new to
computer programming than previous approaches, and that the OOP approach is often simpler to develop and to maintain, lending itself to more direct analysis, coding, and understanding of complex situations and procedures than other programming methods. Translation from real-world phenomena/objects (and vice versa) is eased because there is direct mapping from the real-world to the object-oriented program (generally a many-to-one). The converse mapping, from the object-oriented program back to the real-world, is by way of a one-to-many mapping, where each 'many' is seen to be a collection of well-defined subsets (or superset), which together compose a real-world ''object.'' The corresponding ''object'' defined in the program may be seen as representing some
proper subset of the real-world object's features.
Fundamental concepts
Object-oriented programming (OOP) emphasizes the following concepts:
*
Class (computer science) Class — the unit of definition of data and behavior (functionality) for some kind-of-thing. For example, the 'class of Dogs' might be a
set which includes the various breeds of dogs. A class is the basis of
modularity (programming) modularity and
structure in an object-oriented computer program. ''A class should typically be recognizable to a non-programmer familiar with the problem domain,'' and the code for a class should be (relatively) self-contained and independent (as should the code for any good pre-OOP
subroutine function). With such modularity, the structure of a program will correspond to the
aspects of the
problem that the program is intended to solve. This simplifies the
Map (mathematics) mapping to and from the problem and program.
*
Object (computer science) Object — an instance of a class, an object (for example, "Lassie" the Dog) is the run-time manifestation (''instantiation'') of a ''particular exemplar'' of a class. (For the class of dogs which contains breed types, an acceptable exemplar would only be the '''''subclass''''' 'collie'; "Lassie" would then be an object in that subclass.) Each object has its own data, though the code within a class (or a subclass or an object) may be shared for economy. Thus, object-oriented languages must allow code to be
reentrant.
*
Information hiding Encapsulation — a type of privacy applied to the data and some of the methods (that is, functions or subroutines) in a class, encapsulation ensures that an object can be changed only through established channels (namely, the class's public methods). Encapsulation means wrapping up of data and associated functions into a single unit(called class).Each object exposes an ''
interface (computer science) interface'' — those public methods, which specify how other objects may read or modify it. An interface can prevent, for example, any caller from adding a list of children to a Dog when the Dog is less than one year old.
*
Inheritance (computer science) Inheritance — a mechanism for creating subclasses, inheritance provides a way to define a (sub)class as a specialization or subtype or extension of a more general class (as Dog is a subclass of Canidae, and Collie is a subclass of the (sub)class Dog); a subclass acquires all the data and methods of all of its superclasses, but it can add or change data or methods as the programmer chooses. Inheritance is the "is-a" relationship: a Dog is-a Canidae. This is in contrast to
Object composition composition, the "has-a" relationship, which user-defined datatypes brought to computer science: a Dog has-a mother (another Dog) and has-a father, etc.
*
Abstraction (computer science) Abstraction — the ability of a program to ignore the details of an object's (sub)class and work at a more generic level when appropriate; For example, "Lassie" the Dog may be treated as a Dog much of the time, but when appropriate she is abstracted to the level of Canidae (superclass of Dog) or Carnivora (superclass of Canidae), and so on.
*
polymorphism (computer science) Polymorphism — polymorphism is behavior that varies depending on the class in which the behavior is invoked, that is, two or more classes can react ''differently'' to the ''same message''.
An '''''
object-based language''''' is a language that has most of the properties of an object-oriented language, but lacks inheritance.
OOP as a new paradigm, point of view or marketing term
OOP is subject to much contention as to its precise definition or its principal ideas.
In the most general terms, OOP is the practice of writing program text decomposed in modules that encapsulate the representation of one data type per module, instead of collections of functions that call each other, or clauses that trigger each other.
They have been brought together, with associated terminology, to create a programming framework. Together the ideas behind OO are said to be so powerful they create a
paradigm shift in programming.
Other paradigms such as
Functional programming functional and
procedural programming procedural programming focus primarily on the
Action (philosophy) actions, and
logical programming focuses on the logical assertions that trigger execution of program code.
OOP arose independently out of research into simulation system oriented languages, with SIMULA 67, and out of research into highly secure system architectures, with capability based OS and CPU architectures.
Some experts say that the original definition of Object-oriented came from the
object (grammar) object in
grammar. The requirements for the software are always
subject (grammar) subject-oriented and since the requirements for the subject are often complicated, monolithic complicated programs were created.
Some of the researchers at that time started thinking in an
object (grammar) object-oriented way, which was a paradigm shift from the usual subject-oriented thinking.
According to the object-oriented principles, the
verb is attached to the object and logic associated to the requirement is handled in the object. The following are some examples of the ways by which a subject oriented requirement is translated into object oriented thinking:
*'''Subject oriented:''' The Sales Application saves the Transaction
*'''Object oriented:''' The Transaction saves itself upon receiving a message from the Sales Application
*'''Subject oriented:''' The Sales Application prints the Receipt
*'''Object oriented:''' The Receipt prints itself upon receiving a message from the Sales Application
One distinguishing feature of OOP is the handling of
subtypes of
datatype data types.
Objects' data are generally required to satisfy programmer-defined constraints (i.e.
class (computer science) class invariants). A datatype restricted with such constraint is a subtype of the same datatype without the constraint. These constraints are then both relied on and preserved by the actions (methods) defined for the data. These constraints may either be explicitly declared or implicitly assumed by the programmer. Object-oriented languages provide mechanisms for ensuring that such assumptions are local to one part of the program. They are usually part of
documentation of object-oriented programs.
OOP itself has been used to market many products and services and the actual definitions and benefits attributed to OOP have often been colored by commercial marketing goals. Similarly, many
programming languages have a specific view to OOP that is less general in certain aspects from the more general definition.
Widely-used terminology distinguishes ''object-oriented'' programming from ''object-based''. The former is held to include inheritance (described below), while the latter does not.
The exact definitions of these have some variation depending on point of view. In particular, languages with
static typing often have slightly different views of OO than languages with
dynamic typing, caused by focus on compile-time vs. run-time properties of the programs.
Notes: Abstraction is important to but not unique to OOP.
Reusability is the benefit most often claimed for OOP. However, that is unlikely to be true, as reuse of software is as old as the
David Wheeler invention of the subroutine, reputedly prior to 1950. In fact,
reuse is frequently disputed as being a primary, or even a large, benefit. The ease of translation to and from the target environment, the (improved) ability to maintain a program once written, the ability to do localized debugging, and the (improved) ability to do much larger parallel development efforts are all cited as more significant reasons to use an OOP language.
OOP is often called a
paradigm rather than a style or type of programming to emphasize the point that OOP can change the way
software is developed, by changing the way that
programmers and
software engineers think about software.
The paradigm of OOP is essentially not that of programming but one of design. A system is designed by defining the objects that will exist in that system, the code which actually does the work is irrelevant to the object, or the people using the object, due to encapsulation.
The challenge in OOP therefore is of designing a sane object system.
It should be noted that there are distinct parallels between the object-oriented paradigm and
Systems theory. OOP focuses on objects as units in a system, whereas systems theory focuses on the system itself. In between, one may find software
design patterns or other techniques that use classes and objects as building blocks for larger components. Such components can be seen as an intermediate step from the object-oriented paradigm towards the more "real-life oriented" models of systems theory.
Actor model
OOP is a decomposition paradigm for program code, not a model for computation.
OOP is often confused with the
Actor model of computation. In response to a message that it receives, an Actor can make local decisions, create more Actors, send more messages, and determine how to respond to the next message received.
Almost all OOP languages and systems, including all the major ones such as
SIMULA,
Smalltalk,
C++,
Java programming language Java,
Ruby programming language Ruby,
Python programming language Python and
C sharp C# have
message passing programming capabilities.
See
Actor model implementation Actor model implementations for a discussion on implementations of the Actor model.
In OOP the emphasis is not on how computation is organized, but on how program '''text''' is decomposed into modules, because it is this decomposition that matters as to the program text's comprehensibility and maintainability.
OOP is based on the assumption that the program text's comprehensibility and maintainability is improved by decomposing it into modules, and that the best way to decompose it into modules is to minimize dependencies among modules and maximize the cohesion of functions inside the module, and that this is best achieved by encapsulating the representation of a data type in each module.
There are several distinct styles of object-oriented programming. The distinctions between different styles occur because different programming languages emphasize different aspects of object-oriented facilities and combine with other constructs in different ways.
OOP with procedural languages
In procedural languages, OOP often appears as a form where
data types are extended to behave like a type of an object in OOP, very similar to an
abstract data type with an extension such as
inheritance (computer science) inheritance. Each
method (computer science) method is actually a
subprogram which is syntactically bound to a class.
Static typing with the object-oriented paradigm
Many object-oriented programming languages, such as
C++ and
Java programming language Java, have a static
type system that can be used to check and enforce constraints of
object-oriented design to some extent at compile-time, i.e. ''statically''.
Object-oriented facilities combine with static typing in various ways.
class (computer science) Classes are types of objects.
Many object-oriented languages provide mechanisms for statically checking the type of method parameters, types of private and public data members, types of object references and check the correctness of inheritance and subtyping relationships.
Static type checking can also check
application programming interface API compatibility, enforce data constraints on the users of libraries created with object-oriented methods and reduce the number of type checks performed at run-time for various forms of method dispatch.
Some object-oriented languages, such as
Eiffel programming language Eiffel, supplement the type system with
Assertion (computing) assertions specifying and documenting
invariant (computer science) invariants of classes and the
design by contract contracts of methods, though current Eiffel compilers only check these at run-time, i.e. ''dynamically''.
See
Class-based OOP.
Prototype-based model
Other than using classes, '''prototyping''' is another, less popular, means of achieving object-oriented behavior sharing. After an object is defined, another similar object will be defined by referring to the original one as a template, then listing the new object's differences from the original. Perhaps the most popular prototype-based language is
JavaScript, which is an implementation of
ECMAScript. In prototyping systems, objects themselves are the templates, while classification systems use classes as templates for objects.
The classification approach is so predominant in OOP that many people would define objects as encapsulations that share data by classification and inheritance. However, the more generic term "behavior sharing" acknowledges alternate techniques such as prototyping.
See
Prototype-based programming.
Object-based model
Object-based '''programming''' is centered around the creation of objects and their interactions, but may not have some of the key features of the class-based object-oriented paradigm such as inheritance. Such object-based systems are usually not regarded as object-oriented, because inheritance (viewing
delegation (computer science) delegation as a form of inheritance) is typically identified as the core feature of OOP.
Multimethod model
In this model, the "'''receiver'''" argument to a message is not given special status in message dispatch. Instead, the runtime values of all arguments to message are consulted to determine which method should be executed at runtime. This is related to
double dispatch double or multimethod dispatch.
Note that some feel that set theory or predicate logic is better suited to tackle this kind of complexity.
Possible programming mistakes
There are several common mistakes which programmers can make in object oriented programming. For example, checking the type of an object rather than its membership is a common
antipattern that counteracts the benefits of inheritance and polymorphism.
Critique
Hierarchical taxonomies often do not match the real world and real-world changes according to some critics, and should be avoided. However, many OOP proponents also suggest avoiding hierarchies and instead using OO techniques such as "
Object composition composition". A simple way of avoiding over-specification of hierarchies when modeling the real world is to consider the most specific types of objects and model relationships between those.
Also, many feel that OOP runs counter to the philosophy of relational modeling and relational databases, returning to the
navigational database arrangements of the 1960s. It is not clear that this is the fault of OOP, since database modeling is based fundamentally on different premises than object-oriented modeling. In any case, relational database tables map to associations in object-oriented models, and the differences seem to be purely due to differences in focus. There is a history of misinterpretation of the relationship between object-oriented and relational modeling, which may muddy this issue. Also, there are variances in opinions about the roles and definitions of each. For example, some feel that OOP unnecessarily will copy noun relationship information from the database, when "once and only once" (no duplication) mantra dictates that such is bad practice. Others, in contrast, feel that OOP does not require this duplication, even though some existing OOP-to-relational database products mistakenly take this view, confusing object's data with relationship data. These people would also argue that strict distinctions should be made between data associated with the modelled objects, data associated with the roles and data associated with associations; in particular, object's data should not be (directly) stored in databases by this view, because databases are not a suitable storage for objects, the object already has some mechanism for storing its private information, and storage in database would require unnecessary replication between the object's image in its own storage and the database. The
impedance mismatch between databases and OOP is caused by difference of scale between operations performed by objects and databases; database transactions, the smallest unit of work performed by databases, are much larger than any operations provided by OOP objects. Instead, by this view, databases are good for storing relationships between objects and the references to objects that are associated with roles that those relationships are built on; objects' data could only be stored in databases after collecting and summarising data from groups of objects. Object's private representation details have no place in databases.
Needless to say, the "proper" relationship between OOP and databases is a complex and contentious topic which currently has no consensus solution.
While it is claimed that OOP is better for "large applications", others feel that large applications should instead be reduced to many small applications, such as event-driven procedures that "feed" off a database and
declarative programming-based user interface frameworks.
The bottom line of the conflict seems to be that OOP is mostly a behaviorist view of software design which conflicts with the data-centric, declarative view. In the first, the "interfaces" are primarily behaviors, and data is grouped into objects. In the second the interfaces are primarily data (declarations) and behaviours are grouped into functions, such as "tasks", or "events". The tradeoffs of each approach are complex and often delve deep into human psychology theories. Sometimes both are used, such that OOP is used to build
platform (computing) platform facilities and functional or declarative method is used to build
application software applications for the platform.
Some feel that past criticisms leveled against procedural techniques are based upon poor languages, poor coding practices, or lack of knowledge about how to properly use databases instead of code to manage state and "noun models".
It is recognized that OOP does not necessarily mean lack of complexity. Metaclass programming for example is a demanding skill, and OOP programs can have a complex web of shared or distinct responsibilities, attributes and methods. It can be challenging to distribute
responsibility over objects, or classes—one of many popular
implementation schemes.
Formal definition
There have been several attempts on formalizing the concepts used in object-oriented programming. The following concepts and constructs have been used as interpretations of OOP concepts:
{{col-begin}}
{{col-3}}
*
F-Coalgebra coalgebraic datatypes
*
existential quantification and
modules
{{col-3}}
*
recursion
*
Record (computer science) records and
record extensions
{{col-3}}
*
F-bounded polymorphism
{{col-end}}
Attempts to find a consensus definition or theory behind objects have not proven very successful, and often diverge widely. For example, some definitions focus on mental activities, and some on mere program structuring. One of the simpler definitions is that OOP is the act of using "map" data structures or arrays that can contain functions and pointers to other maps, all with some syntactic and scoping sugar on top. Inheritance can be performed by cloning the maps (sometimes called "prototyping").
OOP in scripting
In recent years, object-based programming has become especially popular in
scripting programming languages, with
abstraction,
Information hiding encapsulation,
reusability, and ease of use being the most commonly cited reasons, (the value of
Inheritance (computer science) inheritance in these languages is often questioned). Smalltalk is probably the first language that fits into this category.
Python programming language Python and
Ruby programming language Ruby are relatively recent languages that were built from the ground up with OOP in mind, while the popular
Perl and
PHP scripting languages have been slowly adding new object oriented features since versions 5 and 4, respectively. The ability of objects to represent "real world" entities is one reason for the popularity of JavaScript and ECMAScript, which is argued to be well suited to representing the
Document Object Model of
HTML and
XML documents on the Internet.
See also:
dynamic language
History
The concept of objects and instances in computing had its first major breakthrough with the
PDP-1 system at
MIT which was probably the earliest example of capability based architecture. Another early example was
Sketchpad made by
Ivan Sutherland in 1963; however, this was an application and not a
programming paradigm.
Objects as programming entities were first introduced in
Simula Simula 67, a programming language designed for making simulations, created by
Ole-Johan Dahl and
Kristen Nygaard of the
Norwegian Computing Centre in
Oslo. (Reportedly, the story is that they were working on ship simulations, and were confounded by the combinatorial explosion of how the different attributes from different ships could affect one another. The idea occurred to group the different types of ships into different classes of objects, each class of objects being responsible for defining its ''own''
data and
behavior.) Such an approach was a simple extrapolation of concepts earlier used in ''analog'' programming. On ''analog'' computers, such direct mapping from real-world phenomena/objects to analog phenomena/objects (and conversely), was (and is) called 'simulation.' Simula not only introduced the notion of classes, but also of instances of classes, which is probably the first explicit use of those notions.
The
Smalltalk language, which was developed at
Xerox PARC, introduced the term ''Object-oriented programming'' to represent the pervasive use of objects and messages as the basis for computation.
Smalltalk creators were influenced by the ideas introduced in
Simula Simula 67, but
Smalltalk was designed to be a fully dynamic system in which objects could be created, modified, and 'consumed' "on the fly" rather than having a system based on static objects. It also introduced the notion of 'inheritance.' (Thus, Smalltalk was clearly a major move beyond the analog programming models, which made no use of "instances of classes," or even Simula, which made no use of the "inheritance property.")
The ideas in
Simula Simula 67 were also used in many other languages, from derivatives of
Lisp programming language Lisp to
Pascal programming language Pascal.
Object-oriented programming developed as the dominant programming methodology during the mid-1980s, largely due to the influence of
C++, an extension of the
C programming language. Its dominance was further cemented by the rising popularity of
Graphical user interfaces, for which object-oriented programming is allegedly well-suited. An example of a closely related dynamic GUI library and OOP language can be found in the
Cocoa (software) Cocoa frameworks on
Mac OS X, written in
Objective C programming language Objective C, an object-oriented, dynamic messaging extension to C based on Smalltalk. OOP toolkits also enhanced the popularity of "event-driven programming" (although this concept is not limited to OOP).
At
ETH Zürich,
Niklaus Wirth and his colleagues had also been investigating such topics as
data abstraction and
modularity (programming) modular programming.
Modula-2 included both, and their succeeding design,
Oberon programming language Oberon included a distinctive approach to object orientation, classes, and such. The approach is unlike Smalltalk, and very unlike C++.
Object-oriented features have been added to many existing languages during that time, including
Ada programming language Ada,
BASIC programming language BASIC,
Lisp programming language Lisp,
Fortran Fortran,
Pascal programming language Pascal, and others. Adding these features to languages that were not initially designed for them often led to problems with compatibility and maintainability of code. "Pure" object-oriented languages, on the other hand, lacked features that many programmers had come to depend upon. To bridge this gap, many attempts have been made to create new languages based on object-oriented methods but allowing some procedural features in "safe" ways. Bertrand Meyer's
Eiffel programming language Eiffel was an early and moderately successful language with those goals.
In the past decade
Java programming language Java has emerged in wide use partially because of its similarity to
C language C and to
C++, but perhaps more importantly because of its implementation using a
Java virtual machine virtual machine that is intended to run code unchanged on many different platforms. This last feature has made it very attractive to larger development shops with heterogeneous environments. Microsoft's
.NET Framework .NET initiative has a similar objective and includes/supports several new languages, or variants of older ones.
More recently, a number of languages have emerged that are primarily object-oriented yet compatible with procedural methodology, such as
Python programming language Python and
Ruby programming language Ruby. Besides Java, probably the most commercially important recent object-oriented languages are
Visual Basic .NET and
C Sharp C# designed for Microsoft's
.NET Framework .NET platform.
Just as
procedural programming led to refinements of techniques such as
structured programming, modern object-oriented software design methods include refinements such as the use of
design pattern (computer science) design patterns,
design by contract, and
modeling languages (such as
Unified Modeling Language UML).
Further reading
{{wikibookspar||Computer programming/Object oriented programming}}
*{{cite book
|first=Martin
|last=Abadi
|authorlink=Martin Abadi
|coauthors=
Luca Cardelli
|year=
|title=A Theory of Objects
|publisher=Springer-Verlag
|id=ISBN 0-387-94775-2
}}
*{{cite book
|first=Harold
|last=Abelson
|authorlink=Harold Abelson
|coauthors=
Gerald Jay Sussman,
Julie Sussman
|year=
|title=[http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/ Structure and Interpretation of Computer Programs]
|publisher=The MIT Press
|id=ISBN 0262011530
}}
*{{cite book
|first=Grady
|last=Booch
|authorlink=Grady Booch
|year=
|title=Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications
|publisher=Addison-Wesley
|id=ISBN 0805353402
}}
*{{cite book
|first=Peter
|last=Eeles
|authorlink=Peter Eeles
|coauthors=
Oliver Sims
|year=
|title=Building Business Objects
|publisher=John Wiley & Sons
|id=ISBN 0-471-19176-0
}}
*{{cite book
|first=Erich
|last=Gamma
|authorlink=Erich Gamma
|coauthors=
Richard Helm,
Ralph Johnson,
John Vlissides
|year=
|title=Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object Oriented Software
|publisher=Addison-Wesley
|id=ISBN 0201633612
}}
*{{cite book
|first=Paul
|last=Harmon
|authorlink=Paul Harmon
|coauthors=
William Morrissey
|year=
|title=The Object Technology Casebook - Lessons from Award-Winning Business Applications
|publisher=John Wiley & Sons
|id=ISBN 0-471-14717-6
}}
*{{cite book
|first=Ivar
|last=Jacobson
|authorlink=Ivar Jacobson
|year=
|title=Object-Oriented Software Engineering: A
use case Use Case-Driven Approach
|publisher=Addison-Wesley
|id=ISBN 0201544350
}}
*{{cite book
|first=Alan
|last=Kay
|authorlink=Alan Kay
|year=
|title=The Early History of Smalltalk
|url=http://gagne.homedns.org/%7etgagne/contrib/EarlyHistoryST.html
}}
*{{cite book
|first=Bertrand
|last=Meyer
|authorlink=Bertrand Meyer
|year=
|title=
Object-Oriented Software Construction
|publisher=Prentice Hall
|id=ISBN 0136291554
|url=
}}
*{{cite book
|first=James
|last=Rumbaugh
|authorlink=James Rumbaugh
|coauthors=
Michael Blaha,
William Premerlani,
Frederick Eddy,
William Lorensen
|year=
|title=Object-Oriented Modeling and Design
|publisher=Prentice Hall
|id=ISBN 0136298419
}}
*{{cite book
|first=David A.
|last=Taylor
|authorlink=David A. Taylor
|year=
|title=Object-Oriented Information Systems - Planning and Implementation
|publisher=John Wiley & Sons
|id=ISBN 0-471-54364-0
}}
{{col-begin}}
{{col-2}}
See also
*
Object-oriented programming language
*
Aspect-oriented programming
*
Programming paradigm
*
Software componentry
*
Interface description language
*
Distributed programming
*
List of object-oriented programming terms
*
Design pattern (computer science)
*
Refactoring
*
CORBA
*
Globus
*
DCOM
{{col-2}}
External links
-
Object-oriented programming FAQ
-
Example of the subtyping problem
-
What are OOP's Jargons and Complexities
-
Object Oriented Design Principles
*The report [http://www.interaction-design.org/mads/articles/object_orientation_redefined.html "Object Orientation Redefined"] outlines how OO has been considered a thinking tool, i.e. "we view the world in objects", and how such an approach may further our understanding of object-oriented formalisation.
-
Modeling Roles : A practical series of Analysis Patterns How to easily identify a Role problem and precisely determine which Role analysis pattern is best to model it.
Criticism
-
OOP Myths/Criticism
-
Objects Have Failed
-
Arguments Against OOP (C2 wiki discussion)
-
OOP Better in Theory than in Practice
-
Why Paul Graham is Creating a New Language Not Especially Object-Oriented
{{col-end}}
Category:Object-oriented programming
{{Link FA|vi}}
ar:برمجة شيئية
bg:Обектно-ориентирано програмиране
ca:Orientació a objectes
cs:ObjektovÄ› orientované programovánÃ
da:Objektorienteret programmering
de:Objektorientierte Programmierung
eo:Objektema programado
es:Programación orientada a objetos
fi:Olio-ohjelmointi
fr:Programmation orientée objet
he:×ª×›× ×•×ª ×ž×•× ×—×” עצמי×?
hu:Objektumorientált
id:Pemrograman Berorientasi Objek
io:Objektema programado
it:Programmazione orientata agli oggetti
ja:オブジェクト指�
lt:Objektinis programavimas
ms:Pengaturcaraan Berorientasikan Objek
nl:Object-oriëntatie
no:Objektorientert programmering
pl:Programowanie obiektowe
pt:Orientação a objeto
ru:Объектно-ориентированное программирование
sv:Objektorienterad programmering
th:�ารเขียนโปร��รมเชิงวัตถุ
tr:Nesne Yönelimli Programlama
uk:Об’єктно-орієнтоване програмуваннÑ?
vi:Láºp trình hÆ°á»›ng đối tượng
zh:��对象的程�设计
ko:�체지향 프로그래�
Category:Programming paradigms
de:Kategorie:Objektorientierte Programmierung
es:CategorÃa:Programación orientada a objetos
io:Category:Objektema programado
pl:Kategoria:Programowanie_obiektowe
ru:КатегориÑ?:Объектно-ориентированное программирование
uk:КатегоріÑ?:Об’єктно-орієнтоване програмуваннÑ?
see
Object-oriented programming
see
Object-oriented programming
*** Shopping-Tip: Object-Oriented programming
