Комментарии:
What is the name of the INSTRUCTOR ??
Ответитьscore = score++;
omg!
..vfddf
ОтветитьWow. For once, I kinda get it. Wish he'd gotten deeper into objects at the end but all in all, I'm at a much better place with this concept. Plus, he's got a cool voice & accent
ОтветитьThe students you teach are so damn lucky, I am jealous. I wish all my classes were taught by you. Your explanation is just so perfect.
ОтветитьVery good explanation 👏.
ОтветитьWhat is his accent
ОтветитьNot gonna lie, I've seen like 4-5 videos but didn't get it. Here I'm halfway through the video and I'm loving it.
Thank you.
I need help
Example:
Button = class
Method = it can take you to the menu
What will property be ???????????
Hello sir would better for me if you can do an explanation of the button class please
ОтветитьThanks
Ответитьwhatever you teaching am learning.
ОтветитьThe explanation is clear. and i anticipate to see more of your videos
ОтветитьExcellent OOP concepts
ОтветитьThank you very much. I never understood what object orientation is before.
ОтветитьBest explanation on here!
ОтветитьReally helpful!
ОтветитьAmazing
ОтветитьThe objects don't represent some abstract ideas
ItemDecoratorProxyManagerFactoryInterface begs to differ!
I prefer object instance and object definition to 'object' and 'class'. In most languages you can have objects without a class reference, or with one. The Class Reference points to the VMT and RTTI (virtual method table and runtime type info) and sits at the start of the object instance. Some languages (ie. Delphi/object pascal) have an 'Object' type for objects who's instances do not contain a class reference-> and 'Class' type for object instances that do. C++ just has classes, no 'object' type, an object is just a class instance.... but surely a class is a definition so a class instance should be an object definition instance... I hope you can see how classes (or specifically, the use of the word class) polluted the OO model, especially syntactically... Object Tree makes less sense than Class Tree though... The lingo around OO is a bit of a mess.... I prefer data or type or data type to object and/or class with (data) cell as property, (data) op instead of method... (data) type definition, (data) type instance.... semi-oo data types such as structs/records confuse the issue even more.
ОтветитьI wish I had teachers like him when I was in School!!
ОтветитьARE YOU A JOURNALIST OR JUST A COMMENTATOR.?
Ответитьsir i want kiss that shiny head
ОтветитьBest explanation ever.
ОтветитьThis is the best OOP tutorial I've ever watched... yet it's been removed from Lynda/LinkedIn Learning now? What gives?
Edit: Found the answer on Allardice's website: "I’m extremely proud of the content I made while I was [at Lynda] — they became the most-watched and highest rated courses across the entire library. A few of these courses can still be found on LinkedIn Learning, but over the last few years others have been retired, replaced, or just removed. I know this has been a frustration for many viewers who enjoyed those courses, and I can only apologize—it’s not something I can control. (And if you haven’t seen them yet, check out my Pluralsight courses above!)"
🚗
ОтветитьNewbie here! So say for example you had a website which could process peoples credit card details. Would the details the customer puts in for their card be the objects and would the machine then process these objects (card details) with the functions defined in the the relevant class for it? Or have I got his totally wrong?
Thanks in advance.
Very well explanation 👍
ОтветитьClass is defined as a template or blueprint which describes the state/behavior Of its object. In other words class is used to create a object.
Nice explanation very clear and easy to understand for a newbie.
It is the best explanation I have ever seen on OOPs ..
ОтветитьI have been programming for 37 years and I believe OOP is a load of bunk developed to make programming easier for the average bear. I remember when I was in college in 1991. There was a computer aptitude test to attend the course, so these people were not stupid by any means. Just the same, the number of people who dropped out was staggering. Then during my career, the number of people I encountered who claimed yea, they were programmers for around 5 years, but then burned out and switched careers was equally staggering. I believe there is a small percentage of people who can handle procedural programming and OOP was developed to cater to the rest. OOP is beneficial for lets say game developers, but for the average business software developer, I don't believe OOP is necessary and probably makes things worse. Everyone knows OOP requires ore up front planning/design work. In the 30 years of my professional programming career, I have never had an issue isolating variables within my functions or code reuse. Just my 2 cents.
ОтветитьYou are really knowledgeable and a sound teacher. A truly master who are willing to transfer IT foundations. We are learning basic but powerful concepts. Many thanks
ОтветитьOh my God can't stop listening to this
ОтветитьWait so is classes the same as components?
ОтветитьThank you for this video. amazing.
ОтветитьNow, go watch Brian Wills video on why object oriented programming sucks in the real world.
Ответитьfruit is a class and mango is an object
this is the only stuff understood after studying
Great teacher with great enthusiasm. I've learnt a lot from him.
Ответитьnice explanation, thank you sir 👍👍👍🙂🙂🙂🙂
ОтветитьI can't believe this video was made in 2011. Best tutor ever!
ОтветитьSo good! Got 2 pages of notes from this Thanks a TON!
Ответитьholy guacamole this a perfect explanation!! thanks A LOT
ОтветитьObject oriented is so much simpler to modify and reinvent in later development cycles.
ОтветитьPresentation
Energy
Reinforcement
Focus
Eloquent
Creativity
Timing.....
..................Just PERFECT