Yes, an object-oriented approach can be used to develop any system, however, not every problem is best solved with an object oriented approach. There is no value in forcefully fitting one architectural paradigm (e.g. the object-oriented model) onto any problem just because this can be done; a good architect will chose the best tool for a given problem, considering the nature of the problem as well as its constraints.
Conventional testing is the traditional approach to testing mostly done when water fall life cycle is used for development, while object oriented testing is used when object oriented analysis and design is used for developing enterprise software. Conventional testing focuses more on decomposition and functional approaches as opposed to object oriented testing, which uses composition. The three levels of testing (system, integration, unit) used in conventional testing is not clearly defined when it comes to object oriented testing. The main reason for this is that OO development uses incremental approach, while traditional development follows a sequential approach. In terms of unit testing, object oriented testing looks at much smaller units compared to conventional testing.
A traditional approach, also known as structured system development, includes many variations which aim to develop information using structured and modular programming. On the other hand, an object oriented approach looks at the information system as a collection of objects that work together to accomplish a task.
The object-oriented approach has the following advantages: when the expert system is large, complexity is reduced through modularization, that is, by subdividing the system into manageable size components, such as objects, and establishing well-defined relationships between them. The internal design of each object is localised so that it does not depend on the internal design of another component. The design concepts are separated from the implementation details. That means that rules are developed separately from the objects that they manipulate. Objects can be reused. They are written and debugged once, and then matched to form new applications. The advantage of separation of the various components is that each of these is autonomous. What should be well-managed are the relationships between them. Unlike the other systems that implement a rule-based system as a library in object-oriented language, this architecture extends this further by applying object technologies to every single component of the expert system, including the rule base.
System analysis and design (SA&D) and object-oriented analysis and design (OOAD) are two different approaches to the development of computer-based information systems. SA&D is a traditional approach that focuses on understanding the requirements of the system, analyzing the current system, and designing a new system that meets those requirements. It is a process-oriented approach that typically involves creating a detailed specification of the system before beginning development. On the other hand, OOAD is a modern approach that focuses on modeling the system as a collection of objects that interact with each other to achieve the desired functionality. It is a more object-oriented approach that involves designing a system by first identifying the objects in the system, their properties, and the relationships between them. Some of the key differences between SA&D and OOAD are: Focus: SA&D focuses on the process of designing a system, while OOAD focuses on the objects in the system and their interactions. Design: SA&D is typically a top-down design approach, while OOAD is a bottom-up design approach. Requirements gathering: SA&D emphasizes the gathering of requirements and creating detailed specifications before beginning development, while OOAD emphasizes rapid prototyping and iterative development. Abstraction: OOAD relies heavily on abstraction, while SA&D relies more on specific details and processes. Overall, both SA&D and OOAD are valid approaches to the development of computer-based information systems, and the choice between them depends on the specific needs and requirements of the project.
As per the website, www.acronymfinder.com, OOPS stands for Object-Oriented Programming and Systems. Regards, Anthony anthonymail@rediffmail.com
What is object-oriented systems development
What is object-oriented systems development
Object Oriented Programming
DBMS Deesign implementation
Conventional testing is the traditional approach to testing mostly done when water fall life cycle is used for development, while object oriented testing is used when object oriented analysis and design is used for developing enterprise software. Conventional testing focuses more on decomposition and functional approaches as opposed to object oriented testing, which uses composition. The three levels of testing (system, integration, unit) used in conventional testing is not clearly defined when it comes to object oriented testing. The main reason for this is that OO development uses incremental approach, while traditional development follows a sequential approach. In terms of unit testing, object oriented testing looks at much smaller units compared to conventional testing.
Conventional testing is the traditional approach to testing mostly done when water fall life cycle is used for development, while object oriented testing is used when object oriented analysis and design is used for developing enterprise software. Conventional testing focuses more on decomposition and functional approaches as opposed to object oriented testing, which uses composition. The three levels of testing (system, integration, unit) used in conventional testing is not clearly defined when it comes to object oriented testing. The main reason for this is that OO development uses incremental approach, while traditional development follows a sequential approach. In terms of unit testing, object oriented testing looks at much smaller units compared to conventional testing
Conventional testing is the traditional approach to testing mostly done when water fall life cycle is used for development, while object oriented testing is used when object oriented analysis and design is used for developing enterprise software. Conventional testing focuses more on decomposition and functional approaches as opposed to object oriented testing, which uses composition. The three levels of testing (system, integration, unit) used in conventional testing is not clearly defined when it comes to object oriented testing. The main reason for this is that OO development uses incremental approach, while traditional development follows a sequential approach. In terms of unit testing, object oriented testing looks at much smaller units compared to conventional testing.
David A. Taylor has written: 'Object-oriented technology' -- subject(s): Database design, Object-oriented databases, Development, Computer software 'Object-oriented information systems' -- subject(s): Management information systems, Object-oriented databases, System design
A single dot (.) represents the current directory in a file system or the current object in object-oriented programming. A double dot (..) represents the parent directory in a file system or the superclass in object-oriented programming.
A traditional approach, also known as structured system development, includes many variations which aim to develop information using structured and modular programming. On the other hand, an object oriented approach looks at the information system as a collection of objects that work together to accomplish a task.
The object-oriented approach has the following advantages: when the expert system is large, complexity is reduced through modularization, that is, by subdividing the system into manageable size components, such as objects, and establishing well-defined relationships between them. The internal design of each object is localised so that it does not depend on the internal design of another component. The design concepts are separated from the implementation details. That means that rules are developed separately from the objects that they manipulate. Objects can be reused. They are written and debugged once, and then matched to form new applications. The advantage of separation of the various components is that each of these is autonomous. What should be well-managed are the relationships between them. Unlike the other systems that implement a rule-based system as a library in object-oriented language, this architecture extends this further by applying object technologies to every single component of the expert system, including the rule base.
System analysis and design (SA&D) and object-oriented analysis and design (OOAD) are two different approaches to the development of computer-based information systems. SA&D is a traditional approach that focuses on understanding the requirements of the system, analyzing the current system, and designing a new system that meets those requirements. It is a process-oriented approach that typically involves creating a detailed specification of the system before beginning development. On the other hand, OOAD is a modern approach that focuses on modeling the system as a collection of objects that interact with each other to achieve the desired functionality. It is a more object-oriented approach that involves designing a system by first identifying the objects in the system, their properties, and the relationships between them. Some of the key differences between SA&D and OOAD are: Focus: SA&D focuses on the process of designing a system, while OOAD focuses on the objects in the system and their interactions. Design: SA&D is typically a top-down design approach, while OOAD is a bottom-up design approach. Requirements gathering: SA&D emphasizes the gathering of requirements and creating detailed specifications before beginning development, while OOAD emphasizes rapid prototyping and iterative development. Abstraction: OOAD relies heavily on abstraction, while SA&D relies more on specific details and processes. Overall, both SA&D and OOAD are valid approaches to the development of computer-based information systems, and the choice between them depends on the specific needs and requirements of the project.