1 / 18

A Comparison of Object Oriented Languages in Software Engineering

A Comparison of Object Oriented Languages in Software Engineering. Written by Mohammed Reza Nami Presented by Mark Simko. Introduction. OOPLs Help companies reduce complexity Increase competition in open markets Speeds up development

ena
Download Presentation

A Comparison of Object Oriented Languages in Software Engineering

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. A Comparison of Object Oriented Languages in Software Engineering Written by Mohammed Reza Nami Presented by Mark Simko

  2. Introduction • OOPLs • Help companies reduce complexity • Increase competition in open markets • Speeds up development • Improves maintenance, resusability, modifiability of software

  3. Importance • O-O improves efficiency in development and maintainance • Decreases complexity • Scalable Distributed Systems

  4. Survey • AT&T Bell Labs project using OOPL found • 30% reduction in development time • 20% reduction in staff effort • Able to reuse the code in many other projects

  5. O-O Concepts • Object and Class • Object being a black box • Objects are individual instances of a class

  6. O-O Concepts (con’t) • Properties • Inheritance • Polymorphism • Dynamic Binding • Encapsulation • Information Hiding

  7. Object Oriented Programming Languages • Smalltalk • C++ • Java • Eiffel

  8. Smalltalk • Pure OOL • Run-time binding • Objects can do 3 things • Hold state • Receive a message • Send a message to itself or another object

  9. C++ • Compatible with C • Fast and efficient • Utilizes compile-time binding • High run-time efficiency with small code size • Trades off some power to reuse classes

  10. Java • Portable, can be used on any web-enabled computer • Mixture of C++ and Smalltalk • Syntax of C++ but improved upon it • Garbage Collection • Virtual Machine

  11. Eiffel Language • Portable • Open System • Design by Contract • Automatic Documentation • Multiple Inheritance • Repeated Inheritance • Statically Typed • Dynamically Bound

  12. Static Typing • Eiffel – Statically typed • C++ - Statically typed (however the language supports C-style “casts” which really amount to invitations to violate type rules • Java – typed, mostly statically but dynamic typing is required for generic container structures • Smalltalk – Dynamically typed

  13. Compilation Technology • Eiffel – Combination of interpretation and compilation in same environment • C++ - Usually complied • Java – Usually mix of interpretation and “on-the-fly” compilation • Smalltalk – Historically interpreter-based, currently mix of interpretation and compliation

  14. OOPLs and Quality Factors • Eiffel – Efficiency and portability • C++ - Efficiency, maintainability, portability and functionality • Java – Maintainability, Usability, Functionality, and Portability • Smalltalk – Functionality and Maintainability

  15. Automatic Documentation • Eiffel can generate many views, graphical or textual • Class interfaces • Inheritance hierarchies • High level “bubbles and arrows” • Diagrams

  16. Multiple Inheritence • Eiffel – Multiple and repeated inheritance, widely used • C++ Multiple inheritance (though discouraged by many for various problems) • Java – Single inheritance (but multiple interface facility) • Smalltalk – Single Inheritance

  17. Building Infrastructures • Java RMI (Remote Method Invocation) • Communicates between networking and distributed computing • Uses a proxy object • Can have many types • Client can find out what service was returned

  18. Conclusion • Used worldwide for commercial, DoD, and other government projects • Less complexity = increase in maintainability • OOPL must treat the O-O paradigm to gain the benefits

More Related