Programming has been somewhat of a hobby. It is sometimes useful to find a computational solution to otherwise tedious task. Some say that today, programming is becoming almost like a writing/reading skill. The concept of Object-Oriented Programming (OOP) is not straight forward to explain without a video or a few examples to someone who has never encountered it before. Briefly, “containers” or “prototypes” of sort are created in computer code and later modified for a particular purpose.
Typical example involves an explanation that “car” is an object and models of cars are sub-types of objects, all based on that main “car” object. So, a programmer writes a few lines of general code that are later re-used for a more specialized task. But, is “object” a good word to describe this concept? Dictionary definition of an “object” is that “object” is a material thing that can be touched, seen, smelled, pushed, pulled, etc.
“Object” in OOP is not really that material, unless we want to consider that potential energy of 5V to create “0s” and “1s” is somewhat material. In reality, the “object” in OOP is nothing more but a collection of logical and data states in computer memory.
Would “Logical Construct Oriented Programming” (LCOP) be better? Sounds a bit complicated.