Object-oriented Programming in 7 minutes | Mosh 

Сидредин this was a good one

1:20 - 1:25 is a car example

Haha.. there is no oops without a car example

@@shivangchaturvedi237 there is...with animals

:))))

Thank you 😊

Thanks

Same feeling here

How

You will never understand the level of your God. God is one who make everyone. God is Allah

Hopefully you caught some of the mistakes. Not sure God would makes those types of mistakes. I found two and only watched a couple of minutes of it this time.

The OP comment is so cringe.

100% Agreed - Great job Mosh Thank you.

Just go through the libraries and the namespaces used in linux code. Thats the best way to understand OOPs. When C++ compiler can covert that c code and layout into OOPs only then we can totally understand how OOPs is being handled.

@@srikanthpen3250 where can we learn that from? I mean what would you recommend?

100% agreed!!

You need to learn more about Java animation and Graphics

I learned it that way, I was a bit confused here.

This video has other errors, too.

You learned from herbet schidlt book??

@@thinkersandimaginers6334 It's just from my personal experience,

you just repeated what he said

The harsh reality is, though, that you probably don't understand from watching this video to pass an OOP exam. It takes years to get to a professional level of understanding of OOP. It's a major dedication, as opposed to something that can abstracted and encapsulated into a short video. And that's not even telling you that this video contains errors, despite the speaker's voice being very confident.

It worked actually xD

lol XD

Good point xD

Hahaha

same buddy

But you didn't notice the glaring mistakes? The part on abstraction is about 99% wrong.

I agree!

@Sergio Díaz Nila Didn't know that, thanks for the tip Sergio!

yep, you can think of the dvd player as a class, and the buttons on the dvd player as methods inside that class

​@@clerpington_the_fifth thanks but what are the properties ?

You got the definition of Abstraction wrong, and your definition of Polymorphism is not quite right. You wouldn't be refactoring anything to achieve poly.

Those aren't very good definitions, though. Your definition of abstraction is incorrect. And polymorphism can be acheived before any "refactoring".

@@kcs3248 But that's not really what polymorphism is. You don't have to refactor anything, and who knows what in the world he meant by "according to different types". Types of what? One of his other definitions was also not right. Just be careful what you read if you are trying to learn OOP. There's a lot of impressive-looking videos about OOP and many of them are wrong.

"of" is not a verb

*have

"of" as in "because of" imho @@archiewoosung5062

HA agreed, that's exactly what I was doing while watching this. Great video for new comers or to recap OOP basics! THX

A coffee break that's less than 30 minutes ain't a real coffee break.

Indeed

you should relax and breath fresh air on coffee break, for fucks sake man

Yeah!! Similar thing happened with me

How is it going now?

You just want things to be easier than they are. You are probably the type that is going to lie on your resume.

@tiluu you mean people that created child labour

@@HOWYOUDOIN884 I partly agree, but I've seen many times, that teachers and professor deepdive into very subtle details before explaining the whole picture simplified. This is not how you teach things. A video like this before getting into details would help many people understand topics way faster and better

@@Heisenberg355 exactly

@@One.Zero.One101 I didn't miss the point of what the guy was saying: "College text books are too hard". OOP takes years to get good at, assuming one's brain is worthy of the challenge and the commitment. And yes, I'm tired of people lying on their resume claiming to be good at OOP, when in reality they were just intrigued by a fancy RU-vid video and have just dabbled in writing classes . I saw one misuse of the word "interface", and then jumped a little past half way and found another mistake @ 4:39 (confusing abstraction with encapsulation). So as pleasing as it may appear to a newbie, they easily could walk away misinformed. It's easy to be attracted to easy material, indeed, but it's also easy to be misinformed and not realize it. That's my complaint about the majority of people who quickly fall in love with an educational video, not realizing the information is not quite right. I think people should read OOP books written by authors with well-established expertise, and not be so attracted to fancy youtube vids.

But in reality, you couldn't watch this video and pass a test over OOP. Not to mention the mistakes in the video, where he uses the wrong word, like "abstraction", which has nothing to do with reducing impact of change. So in reality, just because this video made you feel good, you have a long road ahead of you to become an expert at OOP.

Yeah, Mosh is great at explaining things

Sir aap bhi bahut acha explain krte h

I memorized it the same way! :))

hahaha really nice mnemonic trick!

Haha thanks!

thank you for this! :)

I just remember it!?

Yeah man same, like i understand it in my head but I get nervous

@@ChrisFouadHabibifromMars This may be old but I'll appreciate your reply to a question if you don't mind. Do they ask questions concerning these in interviews?

Let me guess, you are a lil fucker from India that just likes to sound confident.

@Major Key like most Indians you don't make sense but you'd like to think your conference in what you're saying is all that matters

Programming with Mosh definitely bcoz you are the only RU-vidr who makes super quality videos on dot net...

Let me guess, you are a fucker from India that just likes to agree but doesn't understand shit, and you also don't wear deodarant?