9. oo languages

OO Languages

Chapter 9

Object-Oriented Software Systems Engineering – Chapter 9 Slide 1

Objectives

In this chapter we will:
 Introduce some Object Oriented Programming
Languages
 Compare some aspects of these languages


Major OOPL

 Four of the major Object Oriented Programming
languages are:
C++
Smalltalk
Eiffel
Java


Smalltalk

 Smalltalk was for most purposes the first object-
oriented language, although it was based on ideas
first developed in a simulation language called
Simula in the 1960s

 Smalltalk was designed to support a (then)
radically new type of user interface - the graphical
user interface


Smalltalk environment

 Then Smalltalk was synonymous with GUIs - now
they are commonplace

 Smalltalk’s environment is graphical, based on
windows and browsers, and is controlled by a
pointing device


Environment...

 The development environment is an integral part
of Smalltalk, and all aspects of it are available for
inspection and change within a running Smalltalk
system, conversely a Smalltalk system can be
extended by writing new classes which are then
available in the environment for immediate use, so
it is possible to add your own code-writing or
debugging tools, although these are already
present in Smalltalk


...Environment

 Smalltalk has several classes of interactive code
writing and debugging tools. They are:
 Class Hierarchy Browser
 Class Browser
 Workspace
 System Transcript
 Disk Browser
 Walkback; Debugger


Environment Classes

 System Transcript:
 reports events in the system as they occur
 Class Hierarchy Browser
 allows users to browse, edit, and add new classes to the
running system
 Workspace
 allows users to edit and evaluate expressions and
displays the results


Debugging

 Whenever an error occurs Smalltalk displays a
window containing a “walkback” (=backtrace)
which shows the messages that led to the error
 It is possible to resume or to start an interactive
debugging tool to trace messages through the
objects leading up to the error
 Objects can also initiate error recovery whenever
a message they send is not understood by the
receiver


Smalltalk Summary

 Designed for interactive and extensible use,
therefore:
 environment is available for modification and extension
 language is semi-compiled then interpreted
 has dynamic binding and
 dynamic typing


Smalltalk Summary

 everything is an object
 conceptually consistent
 run-time error recovery
 well-integrated debugging facilities
 “clean” design to support quick learning
 automatic garbage collection for ease of use


C++

 C++ is not tightly integrated with its development
environment and aspects of the environment are
not usually available to the programmer
 Unlike Smalltalk it is compiled, and so is much
less interactive, all changes and evaluations being
made in the traditional edit-compile-execute cycle


C++

 C++ was designed as a production software
language, so much of it is designed to be fast at
the expense of simplicity


C++ Programming

 C++ is a hybrid of two languages, C and an object-
oriented extension - so it can also accept existing
C programs
 C++ has been used to “object-orientize” existing C
programs, a major factor in its popularity
 But this means that it is harder to use than
Smalltalk because the language is much more
complex


C++ Error Handling

 C++ can handle run-time errors by writing
exception handlers which trap and deal with the
error

 They fulfill a role similar to that of the
“doesNotUnderstand” message in Smalltalk,
although in C++ an object can never fail to
understand a message because C++ is statically
typed


C++ Environment

 A typical C++ environment contains program
editing, debugging (tracing and breakpointing)
and library facilities
 Debugging tools depend on what the vendor can
supply - there is no standard - but many good
debugging and single-stepping tools are available
(e.g. Borland C++)


C++ Environment

 Libraries are also non-standard, although many
libraries conform closely to a de-facto standard


C++ Summary

 C++ was designed for production programming
and to be compatible with C:
 compiled for speed of execution
 not very interactive
 strong static typing to catch programming errors before
execution


C++ Summary continued

 choice of static / dynamic binding for speed => confusion
 debugging less well integrated, though often good
 special run-time error recovery mechanism = exceptions
 “dirty” design to support existing C code + OO
extensions
 constructor and destructor functions to speed up object
creation and deletion


Comparison

 C++:
 edit-compile-execute
 compiled (interpreters exist)
 language separate from environment
 many variations of environment from different vendors
 widely ported to different platforms


...Comparison

 Smalltalk:
 interactive
 interpreted (compilers exist)
 language integrated with environment
 only one vendor
 limited number of hardware platforms


...Comparison

 C++:
 statically typed
 static or dynamic binding (user chooses)
 environment is not part of programs
 standardised syntax and semantics
 constructor / destructor functions - no garbage collection


...Comparison

 Smalltalk:
 dynamically typed (“doesNotUnderstand” message)
 dynamic binding always
 environment can confuse - part of all programs
 standardisation not really a major problem yet (ParcPlace
and Digitalk have produced different versions)
 automatic garbage collection


Strengths

 C++: Systems Engineering
 portable
 quick
 large libraries
 C compatible


...Strengths

 Smalltalk - Rapid Prototyping & Development
 interactive
 interpreted
 easy to understand
 easy to learn
 highly integrated


Eiffel

Eiffel was designed by Bertrand Meyer as a systems
engineering language
 It has a clean, efficient design with many features
to ensure the correctness of code:
 pre-conditions
 post-conditions
 assertions
 invariants


...Eiffel

 Eiffel has automatic garbage collection which can
be programmer-controlled
 It was designed to be compatible with C library
code, but this feature is never emphasized
 Eiffel is a proprietary language and has never had
a good programming environment
 Like C++ there is provision for exception handlers


...Eiffel

 Eiffel has failed to make a major impact because:
 compatibility with C syntax is low
 it’s proprietary
 there were to few good environments


Eiffel Summary

 Eiffel was designed as a clean systems
engineering language, so:

 automatic garbage collection
 static typing
 dynamic binding (but compiler can optimize to static)


...Eiffel Summary

 checkable assertions
 documentation tools
 “new” design with no old compatibility features
 poor backward compatibility with C


Java

 Java is the most trendy computer programming
language ever
 Also the only programming language ever to make
the front cover of Time magazine
 Likely to become the major WWW programming
language
 Could achieve a critical mass for OOP in the as yet
non converted industry


Background

 Java comes form the Oak project at Sun
Microsystems to develop embedded applications
and set top boxes for telecommunications
services
 Java is a clean OO language designed for wide
scale distribution
 Java compiles to ByteCodes which then
interpreted by a Virtual Machine on a host
computer (like Smalltalk 20 years ago)


Language features

 Syntax is based on C and C++
“C++ without the guns, knives and clubs”: James Gosling
 However it has single inheritance, dynamic linking
and is fully OO, more like Smalltalk than C++
 Strongly typed like C++ and Eiffel
 No (visible) pointers unlike C++ and like Smalltalk


Immediate Future

 Long range predictions are futile
 Java will have significant impact
 It is still fairly new
 Its popularity could cause problems if
expectations can’t be met
 Object thinking is more important than language
 Look out for C# and .NET


Web

 universally employed
 first use of Web was relatively static, lacking
component-based infrastructure
 could be standards-based infrastructure
 diverse object application models that conform to
a core set of standards
 ActiveX components, Java and CORBA objects,
Agents


Web object-based developments

 IIOP (Internet Inter-ORB Protocol) - a CORBA
standard that defines network interfaces for OO
applications over the Internet
 will serve as basis for Netscape ONE (Open
Network Environment)
 will provide developers with an open standards-
based framework for building interoperable
Internet applications


Interoperability among diverse platforms

 Microsoft is member of OMG in name only so far
 never supported their standards
 Microsoft now shifting more towards Internet
 DCOM (distributed common object model) of
Microsoft
 .NET coming


Benefits through Web

 support modularity, reusability and integration
 together objects plus infrastructure =
improvements
 people are becoming object developers
 object marketplace has started up quickly
 financial services, telecommunications industries
need: rapid deployment, reliability, modularity and
flexibility of OT


Summary

In this chapter we have:
 Introduced some Object Oriented Programming
Languages
 Compared some aspects of these languages


9. oo languages

More Related Content

Viewers also liked (9)

Similar to 9. oo languages (20)

More from APU (20)

9. oo languages

Editor's Notes