BorlandTalk.com Forum Index BorlandTalk.com
Borland discussion newsgroups
 
Archives   FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

RAD and COP
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> C++ Builder (Non-Technical)
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
fwang11
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:07 pm    Post subject: RAD and COP Reply with quote




Is RAD same thing as COP (Component Oriented Programming)?

Back to top
OBones
Guest





PostPosted: Sat Oct 16, 2004 5:15 pm    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote



fwang11 wrote:

Quote:
Is RAD same thing as COP (Component Oriented Programming)?

I'd say they are similar, but COP doesn't mean Visible components, this

may well be just using standard "blocks" called components, that you put
together to build your application.

Back to top
Colin B Maharaj
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:36 pm    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote



Remember also OBones that the VCL contain NON-Visual components as well.

OBones wrote:
Quote:
fwang11 wrote:

Is RAD same thing as COP (Component Oriented Programming)?


I'd say they are similar, but COP doesn't mean Visible components, this
may well be just using standard "blocks" called components, that you put
together to build your application.

Back to top
Colin B Maharaj
Guest





PostPosted: Sun Oct 17, 2004 11:36 pm    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

Remember also OBones that the VCL contain NON-Visual components as well.

OBones wrote:
Quote:
fwang11 wrote:

Is RAD same thing as COP (Component Oriented Programming)?


I'd say they are similar, but COP doesn't mean Visible components, this
may well be just using standard "blocks" called components, that you put
together to build your application.

Back to top
OBones
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:06 am    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

Colin B Maharaj wrote:
Quote:
Remember also OBones that the VCL contain NON-Visual components as well.

I know, I'm writing some of them (JVCL) <g>

This is also why I have trouble explaining the difference/similarities
between RAD and COP.

Back to top
fwang11
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2004 8:01 am    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote


OBones <obones_grere_ (AT) _gregr_altern (DOT) org> wrote:
Quote:
Colin B Maharaj wrote:
Remember also OBones that the VCL contain NON-Visual components as well.

I know, I'm writing some of them (JVCL)
This is also why I have trouble explaining the difference/similarities
between RAD and COP.

RAD is certainly beyond OOP and need COP.

For example, event is not an OOP concept.
How could a Button object send ButtonClick() event message to
a Form object? It is not an OOP concept.







Back to top
Peter Agricola
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2004 3:39 pm    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

"fwang11" wrote:
Quote:
RAD is certainly beyond OOP and need COP.

For example, event is not an OOP concept.

Nor a COP concept.

Quote:
How could a Button object send ButtonClick() event message to
a Form object? It is not an OOP concept.

And how does a Component do that? Remember the Win32 API is written in plain
C. Events are not exclusive for components.

This is from the BCB help, The TComponent Branch:
"TComponent is the common ancestor of all VCL components. Components are
objects that you can manipulate on forms at design time. Despite its name,
the VCL consists mostly of nonvisual objects."

Components are Objects.


Peter.



Back to top
Micha Nelissen
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2004 4:06 pm    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

Peter Agricola wrote:
Quote:
This is from the BCB help, The TComponent Branch:
"TComponent is the common ancestor of all VCL components. Components are
objects that you can manipulate on forms at design time. Despite its name,
the VCL consists mostly of nonvisual objects."

Components are Objects.

For the VCL, or in general? I remember a quote saying: "Object oriented
programming is neither necessary nor sufficient for component oriented
programming." Don't know who it's from, TBH.

Micha

Back to top
Peter Agricola
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2004 7:06 pm    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote


"Micha Nelissen" wrote:
Quote:
Components are Objects.

For the VCL, or in general? I remember a quote saying: "Object oriented
programming is neither necessary nor sufficient for component oriented
programming." Don't know who it's from, TBH.

Yes, for the VCL. Objects only have meaning for the compiler. IIRC the first
C++ compilers generated C code wich was compiled to asm or machine code.
Maybe some compilers still do.


Peter



Back to top
mr_organic
Guest





PostPosted: Mon Oct 18, 2004 8:05 pm    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

"Peter Agricola" <please (AT) no-spam (DOT) com> wrote in
news:4174141b (AT) newsgroups (DOT) borland.com:

Quote:
IIRC the
first C++ compilers generated C code wich was compiled to asm or
machine code. Maybe some compilers still do.


Peter


That's true. The first C++ compiler I ever used was the AT&T CFront
compiler, and it was basically a preprocessor that parsed C++ code and spit
out C, which was then compiled into object code. HP and SUN were the same
(and still are, unless they've changed dramatically in the last few
years).

mr_organic

Back to top
fwang11
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2004 3:48 am    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

"Peter Agricola" <please (AT) no-spam (DOT) com> wrote:
Quote:

"fwang11" wrote:
RAD is certainly beyond OOP and need COP.

For example, event is not an OOP concept.

Nor a COP concept.

How could a Button object send ButtonClick() event message to
a Form object? It is not an OOP concept.

And how does a Component do that? Remember the Win32 API is written in plain
C. Events are not exclusive for components.


In C#, event is a member of class, event handler use delegate type. Is this OOP or COP? What is differnce between OOP and COP?


Quote:
This is from the BCB help, The TComponent Branch:
"TComponent is the common ancestor of all VCL components. Components are
objects that you can manipulate on forms at design time. Despite its name,
the VCL consists mostly of nonvisual objects."

Components are Objects.

So, COP is OOP then?





Back to top
Peter Agricola
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2004 6:43 am    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

"fwang11" wrote:
Quote:
In C#, event is a member of class, event handler use delegate type. Is
this OOP or COP?

None of them specific. It is a old programming paradigm known as a callback
function. You assign an address of a function, a function pointer, to a
given variable. When the code reaches some point the function in the
variable is called.

this is from MSDN:
"A delegate declaration defines a reference type that can be used to
encapsulate a method with a specific signature. A delegate instance
encapsulates a static or an instance method. Delegates are roughly similar
to function pointers in C++; however, delegates are type-safe and secure."

Quote:
What is differnce between OOP and COP?
So, COP is OOP then?

The differences seem very academic to me. I would say OOP is a programming
and design paradigm where COP is only a design paradigm, most of the time,
but not necessarily, implemented using OOP programming paradigm.



Peter



Back to top
Hendrik Schober
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2004 9:22 am    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

Peter Agricola <please (AT) no-spam (DOT) com> wrote:
Quote:
[...] IIRC the first
C++ compilers generated C code wich was compiled to asm or machine code.
Maybe some compilers still do.

Comeau (probably the most conformant C++
compiler iut there) does this.

Quote:
Peter


Schobi

--
[email]SpamTrap (AT) gmx (DOT) de[/email] is never read
I'm Schobi at suespammers dot org

"The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely
to be prefered to those thinking they've found it."
Terry Pratchett



Back to top
Marcelo R. Lopez, Jr.
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:08 pm    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

Hendrik Schober wrote:

Quote:
Peter Agricola <please (AT) no-spam (DOT) com> wrote:


[...] IIRC the first
C++ compilers generated C code wich was compiled to asm or machine code.
Maybe some compilers still do.



Comeau (probably the most conformant C++
compiler iut there) does this.



Peter




Schobi



And it will probably remain the most compliant SPECIFICALLY because of

that.

Back to top
Marcelo R. Lopez, Jr.
Guest





PostPosted: Tue Oct 19, 2004 7:12 pm    Post subject: Re: RAD and COP Reply with quote

Peter Agricola wrote:

Quote:
What is differnce between OOP and COP?
So, COP is OOP then?



The differences seem very academic to me. I would say OOP is a programming
and design paradigm where COP is only a design paradigm, most of the time,
but not necessarily, implemented using OOP programming paradigm.



Peter



This I gotta hear....is what I hear you saying is that COP is

essentially a way of OOD ? Because I can design splendid
code in C with structures, where the components are the structures and
the functions are the operators (or methods, if you
want to use C++ - speak ) that manipulate these structures....but I
don't consider this as employing OOD or OOP.

Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    BorlandTalk.com Forum Index -> C++ Builder (Non-Technical) All times are GMT
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2006 phpBB Group
SEO toolkit © 2004-2006 webmedic.