Talk:Helper class

"Bad practice"

Hi, I removed the comment:

"that is not recommended" since

no citation was given since November and afaik it is not bad practice. I am a computer science teacher from HUJI

I would argue that it is a bad practice for the simple reason that the example provided is not object oriented at all. It's a collection of static functions like something you would find in legacy C or VB6 code. A better object model would eliminate the need for all these static functions and this class in its entirety. Tragically, OOAD does not appear to be taught in schools, so it is often not practiced in industry. From what I have seen, many college graduates do not know how to decompose a large problem into domain classes. The consequence is that projects following these practices simply do not scale. At some point, such code bases become unmaintainable and suffer from technical debt. I am the author of several Java books, articles, and courses that are taught worldwide, but that's not necessarily a reason to take my word for it. Take a look at the original Smalltalk-80 system. It's an excellent example of OO done well. Madhu (talk) 20:16, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Utility class?

Does Helper class and Utility class refer to the same thing? Are they synonyms? Should the articles be merged? -- Frap (talk) 12:58, 31 January 2014 (UTC)