cs304 GDB fall 2010 helping material just for idea

[Xpert]

View more random threads:

• Mgt211 GDB first solution fall 2010 November 8th
• CS502 Fundamentals of Algorithms GDB No.1 Solution Fall...
• ACC501 Business Finance GDB No.2 Fall 2013 Due Date:January...
• MCM310 Journalistic Writing GDB Solution Fall Semester 2012
• MGT501 GDB Solution May 6,2010
• Mkt624 GDB No. 3 sping June 2011
• ECO402 GDB2 Solution July 2010
• MCM311 GDB Spring 2011 idea Solution
• MGT502 GDB idea solution Spring 2011
• MGT111 GDB NO-01 Discussion and Solution Fall 2014 November...

Kindly DOnt COpy it, it is just for give an idea & for help of students.

Yes! in object oriented programming basic paradigms like Abstraction, Encapsulation, Aggregation, Composition, Inheritance, Polymorphism, Templates etc are based and works in a same way as human thinks and behave in our daily life.
for example if we take a man, the other cant know his name & other information which is in his mind, either he want, other know only those things which the person only want, & allow all to know about them, & we see in a daily life, a child or man inherit a things from his parents & forefather, & also these concept use in other things in daily life.
All the things is made in a real life with every small objects like a body made with diffrent objects like hand,feet,eyes etc.
So we see all these concepts also used in Object Oriented Programming. & for making an object in OOP we used these concepts.

Sponsored Links

[Xpert]

One more idea solution

idea solution
• Not really -- we think that way with some things ("man" and "woman" are subclasses of "person") but the real world has so many exceptions to basic structure and is so capricious and random that trying to define it all in terms of classes leads to disaster. The Victorians experienced this problem when trying to fit the duck-billed platypus and the echidna into their taxonomic system of latin naming for species: to them, everything should follow the rules they assigned to phylum, genus, family, etc. but these two animals didn't. So the Victorians said they were freaks of nature, whereas what they actually meant was that they were freaks of the Victorian classification system. They'd have loved it if they really could make classes and subclasses of everything... but the universe just doesn't work that way, and the way our brains deal with the universe doesn't, either: to try to get our heads around things we do make patterns - sometimes patterns which aren't really there, hence optical illusions - but in a basic sense, no.
• Disagree. Computers and brains work differently (and I'm talking about the logical differences.)