View Single Post
Old 01-24-2010, 08:31 AM   #13
netseeker
sleepless reader
netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.netseeker ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
netseeker's Avatar
 
Posts: 4,763
Karma: 615547
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany, near Stuttgart
Device: Sony PRS-505, PB 360° & 302, nook wi-fi, Kindle 3
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward View Post
You want high performance computing? Scrap Object Oriented Architecture...
You could also write "You want high performance computing? Scrap [insert anything else than monolithic architecture, procedural programming and assembler]".

Anyway, usually complex high performance systems are based on a functional architecture and incooperate object oriented architecture these days.

And yes, you can build high performance systems even with usage of object oriented architectures. Sure, similiar systems without an object oriented aproach would be most likely more performant, though also most likely worse maintainable and lesser reuseable. I've seen, designed and implemented different aproaches and i still prefer the object oriented aproach, though with restrictions if the requested system really targets "high performance".

As always, this is just my personal opinion based on my own experiences and hidden prejudices.
netseeker is offline   Reply With Quote