Greg Perry liveammo.com> writes:
> Is it safe to say that classes are only useful for instances where reuse is a
key consideration? From my very
> limited perspective, it seems that classes are in most cases overkill for
simple tasks (such as reading
> the command line then calculating a hash/ch
"Greg Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> That makes sense, thank you for the detailed explanation
> Andrei. For this simple project I am working on, it looks
> like the most direct route would be to use functions
Thats often the case. Often when people start with OOP
they try to do everythi
"Greg Perry" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> I am still in the process of learning OOP concepts and
> reasons why classes should be used instead of
> functions etc.
That's OK, many folks find the transition hard at first.
It is a new way of looking at problems.
> One thing that is not apparent to
That makes sense, thank you for the detailed explanation Andrei. For this
simple project I am working on, it looks like the most direct route would be to
use functions and only develop classes for the portions of the program that can
be reused.
Is it safe to say that classes are only useful fo
Hi Greg,
Greg Perry wrote:
> I am still in the process of learning OOP concepts and
> reasons why classes should be used instead of functions etc.
>
> One thing that is not apparent to me is the best way for
> classes to communicate with each other. For example,
Good question. Unfortunately
Hi again,
I am still in the process of learning OOP concepts and reasons why classes
should be used instead of functions etc.
One thing that is not apparent to me is the best way for classes to communicate
with each other. For example, I have created an Args class that sets a variety
of inter
