Hubbry Logo
Object (computer science)Object (computer science)Main
Open search
Object (computer science)
Community hub
Object (computer science)
logo
7 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Object (computer science)
Object (computer science)
Object (computer science)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

In software development, an object is an entity semantic that has state, behavior, and identity. [1][2][3][4] An object can model some part of reality or can be an invention of the design process whose collaborations with other such objects serve as the mechanisms that provide some higher-level behavior. Put another way, an object represents an individual, identifiable item, unit, or entity, either real or abstract, with a well-defined role in the problem domain.[1]: 76 

A programming language can be classified based on its support for objects. A language that provides an encapsulation construct for state, behavior, and identity is classified as object-based. If the language also provides polymorphism and inheritance it is classified as object-oriented.[5] A language that supports creating an object from a class is classified as class-based. A language that supports object creation via a template object is classified as prototype-based.

The concept of object is used in many different software contexts, including:

In purely object-oriented programming languages, such as Java and C#, all classes might be part of an inheritance tree such that the root class is Object, meaning all objects instances of Object or implicitly extend Object.

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Object (computer science)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
In , particularly within (OOP), an object is a self-contained entity that encapsulates both —representing its state—and methods—defining its behaviors—serving as a modular building block for software systems that model real-world or abstract concepts. Objects are instances created from classes, which act as blueprints specifying the structure, attributes, and operations shared by all instances of that type. This paradigm emerged in the 1960s with the development of , the first language to introduce classes and objects for simulation purposes, later popularized by Smalltalk in the 1970s under the influence of Alan Kay's vision of computational entities interacting like biological cells. Central to objects is encapsulation, which bundles data (such as instance variables for attributes like a bicycle's speed or gear) and restricts direct access to it, allowing interaction only through public methods (such as accelerating or braking) to maintain integrity and hide implementation details. Through mechanisms like and polymorphism, objects enable and flexible hierarchies, where subclasses extend or override behaviors from parent classes, facilitating scalable designs in languages like , C++, and Python. Objects interact via , where one object invokes methods on another, promoting and supporting complex systems by abstracting away internal complexities.

Definition

Core Elements

In computer science, an object is defined as an active that combines internal state—consisting of attributes or properties—and , implemented through procedures or methods that operate on that state. This dual nature positions the object as a fundamental building block in programming paradigms that emphasize and . Objects function as runtime entities, existing during program execution and encapsulating both mutable , which can change over time, and the associated operations that manipulate this in a controlled manner. By bundling these elements, objects promote data hiding and localized control, reducing complexity in software design. This encapsulation ensures that an object's internal workings are accessible only through defined interfaces, such as method calls, fostering reusability and . A key concept is that objects model either real-world entities, like physical devices or organisms, or abstract concepts, such as mathematical structures or processes, thereby enabling developers to organize modularly around these representations. For instance, a "" object might encapsulate state through attributes like speed (an representing current velocity) and color (a denoting its appearance), while providing behavior via methods such as accelerate() to modify the speed. Objects are typically created as instances from classes, which serve as blueprints specifying the attributes and methods.

Distinction from Data Structures

In , data structures such as arrays and linked lists primarily serve as passive containers for organizing and storing to facilitate efficient access and manipulation, without inherently bundling associated behaviors or operations. In contrast, objects in integrate both (attributes) and procedures (methods) into a cohesive unit, enabling active entities that encapsulate state and behavior for more dynamic interactions. A fundamental distinction lies in the support for advanced mechanisms like polymorphism and , which allow objects to exhibit flexible behaviors and hierarchical relationships, features not present in basic structures that rely on fixed representations and external functions. For instance, a struct organizes fields like coordinates in a point but requires separate procedural functions for operations such as calculation, whereas a class for a Point object seamlessly combines fields (e.g., x and y) with methods like distanceTo(otherPoint), promoting localized and reusable code. This integration fosters layers that model real-world entities more naturally, thereby reducing complexity in large-scale systems by promoting and over fragmented procedural approaches. Such also enhances encapsulation, allowing internal details to remain hidden while exposing only necessary interfaces.

Characteristics

Encapsulation

Encapsulation is a fundamental principle in that involves bundling data attributes and the methods that operate on them into a single unit, known as an object, while restricting direct access to the internal state to protect it from unauthorized or inadvertent modification. This approach, often referred to as , ensures that the object's internal implementation details are concealed, exposing only a well-defined interface through which interactions occur. By doing so, encapsulation maintains the integrity of the object's data and promotes a clear separation between what an object does and how it achieves its functionality. The primary mechanisms for achieving encapsulation include access control modifiers, such as , private, and protected, which dictate the visibility and accessibility of class members across different scopes in a program. For instance, private attributes can only be accessed within the class itself, forcing external code to interact via methods like getters and setters, thereby preventing direct manipulation and enforcing validation rules. These mechanisms enable developers to enforce invariants on the object's state, such as ensuring a numerical value remains non-negative, without exposing the underlying logic to clients. Encapsulation offers several key benefits, including enhanced modularity by allowing components to be developed and tested independently, reduced coupling between objects since changes to internal details do not propagate to dependent code, and simplified maintenance as modifications can be localized without widespread refactoring. It also improves code reusability and security by shielding sensitive data from external interference, making systems more robust and easier to evolve over time. This principle briefly enables higher-level abstraction by focusing interactions on essential behaviors rather than implementation specifics. A practical example of encapsulation appears in Python, where attributes prefixed with a single , such as _balance in a BankAccount class, signal that they are intended to be private and not accessed directly from outside the class, though Python's relies on developer discipline rather than strict enforcement.

python

class BankAccount: def __init__(self, initial_balance=0): self._balance = initial_balance # Private attribute def deposit(self, amount): if amount > 0: self._balance += amount def get_balance(self): return self._balance

class BankAccount: def __init__(self, initial_balance=0): self._balance = initial_balance # Private attribute def deposit(self, amount): if amount > 0: self._balance += amount def get_balance(self): return self._balance

In this structure, the _balance attribute is bundled with methods like deposit and get_balance, ensuring that balance updates occur only through controlled interfaces to maintain .

Identity and State

In , an object's identity is defined as a unique, unchanging that distinguishes it from all other objects, typically represented by a or an opaque provided by the . This identity persists throughout the object's lifetime, independent of any modifications to its internal data. In contrast, the object's state encompasses the current values of its attributes, fields, or , which encapsulate the descriptive information defining the object's condition at any given time. A fundamental is that changes to an object's state do not affect its identity, enabling consistent tracking and to the same across mutations. This separation ensures that operations like assignment or passing by maintain the object's uniqueness, even as its attributes evolve through method invocations or external interactions. This distinction has key implications for object semantics. It supports distinct forms of equality checks: identity equality, which verifies if two references point to the same object (e.g., using the == operator in languages like ), versus value equality, which compares the contents of the state (e.g., via an overridden equals method). Additionally, object identity underpins garbage collection mechanisms by allowing the runtime to trace reachable objects through graphs, reclaiming those without live references. For instance, consider two BankAccount objects in a system like Java, both initialized with a balance attribute of $1000. Although their states appear identical in terms of balance value, they possess distinct identities and are treated as separate entities, preventing unintended sharing unless explicitly aliased. Encapsulation further reinforces this by restricting direct state modifications while identity remains accessible via references.

Role in Programming Paradigms

In Object-Oriented Programming

In (OOP), objects serve as the fundamental units, acting as runtime instances of classes that encapsulate both and behavior to model real-world or abstract entities. These instances embody the four core pillars of OOP—encapsulation, , polymorphism, and —which enable modular, reusable, and extensible code structures. Encapsulation bundles an object's internal state () and methods (operations) together, hiding details from external access to maintain integrity and promote . allows objects to derive properties and behaviors from parent classes, fostering hierarchical relationships that avoid code duplication while enabling specialization. Polymorphism permits objects of different classes to be treated uniformly through a , with method resolution occurring at runtime based on the actual object type. focuses on essential features by defining classes that expose only relevant behaviors via public methods, concealing unnecessary complexities. The instantiation process creates an object from its class blueprint, typically invoking a constructor—a special method that initializes the object's state with default or provided values. Constructors are automatically called upon object creation, ensuring proper setup of instance variables before the object is usable, and they can be parameterized to accept initial data. This mechanism supports the pillars by establishing encapsulated state from the outset, with the object's identity distinguishing it from others even if states are similar. Objects interact primarily through , where one object sends a request (message) to another to invoke a method, promoting and dynamic behavior as envisioned in early OOP designs. This communication model aligns with polymorphism and , allowing senders to remain agnostic about receivers' internal implementations while leveraging for compatible interfaces. A representative example in C++ illustrates these concepts: consider a Point class representing a 2D coordinate, with private integer members x_ and y_ for encapsulation, a constructor for instantiation, and methods like SetLocation for state modification via message passing.

cpp

class Point { public: Point(const int x, const int y); // Constructor for instantiation void SetLocation(const int x, const int y); // Method invoked via message passing private: int x_; // Encapsulated state int y_; // Encapsulated state }; // Implementation Point::Point(const int x, const int y) { x_ = x; y_ = y; } void Point::SetLocation(const int x, const int y) { x_ = x; y_ = y; } // Usage: Instantiation and interaction Point p(3, 4); // Creates object instance p.SetLocation(5, 6); // Message passing to modify state

class Point { public: Point(const int x, const int y); // Constructor for instantiation void SetLocation(const int x, const int y); // Method invoked via message passing private: int x_; // Encapsulated state int y_; // Encapsulated state }; // Implementation Point::Point(const int x, const int y) { x_ = x; y_ = y; } void Point::SetLocation(const int x, const int y) { x_ = x; y_ = y; } // Usage: Instantiation and interaction Point p(3, 4); // Creates object instance p.SetLocation(5, 6); // Message passing to modify state

This structure demonstrates how an object like p inherits no explicit parent here but could extend a base Shape class for polymorphism, with the constructor ensuring initial abstraction of coordinates.

In Other Paradigms

In , objects are typically represented as immutable structures, such as records, paired with pure functions that operate on them without side effects. In languages like , records are defined using algebraic types with labeled fields, allowing for structured, immutable representation. For example, a record might be declared as data Person = Person { name :: [String](/page/String), age :: Int }, where the cannot be modified in place; instead, any "update" creates a new record, such as person { age = 31 }. Associated pure functions, like getAge :: Person -> Int, provide behavior without altering state, ensuring and enabling . This approach contrasts with mutable objects by emphasizing immutability to avoid concurrency issues and simplify reasoning about code. In procedural programming, object-like behavior can be approximated using structs combined with function pointers, a technique common in early C practices to emulate encapsulation and methods without native object-oriented support. A struct holds the data state, while an array or set of function pointers within or alongside it simulates methods that operate on that state. For instance, a Shape struct might include fields for coordinates and a function pointer array for operations like draw or area, initialized via a constructor-like function: void initShape(Shape* s, double x, double y) { s->draw = drawCircle; }. This allows polymorphic-like dispatch by swapping function pointers at runtime, though it lacks automatic inheritance and requires manual memory management. Such patterns were used in systems programming to organize code modularly before dedicated OOP languages emerged. Hybrid paradigms, particularly the actor model in concurrent systems, treat objects as independent, autonomous units that encapsulate state and behavior through asynchronous message passing. Introduced as a foundational model for concurrent computation, actors function as computational entities that receive messages, process them internally (potentially creating new actors or sending further messages), and maintain private state invisible to others. In this setup, each actor acts like an object with encapsulated data and methods, but concurrency is handled via isolated execution rather than shared memory, avoiding race conditions. Languages like Erlang and Akka implement this model, where actors provide object-oriented features in distributed environments without traditional OOP hierarchies. Across these paradigms, core object concepts like encapsulation—bundling data and operations while hiding internal details—persist to promote and , even as features such as and full polymorphism are absent or limited. In functional and procedural contexts, encapsulation relies on language mechanisms like modules, closures, or opaque types rather than classes, allowing data protection without mutable references or subtype relationships. This selective adoption highlights how object principles adapt to emphasize immutability, procedural organization, or concurrency isolation over comprehensive OOP mechanics.

Implementation Aspects

Memory Representation

In many object-oriented languages, such as , objects are dynamically allocated in a dedicated of known as the heap, which allows their lifetime to extend beyond the scope of the allocating function or method, while in others like C++, they can also be allocated on the stack. This allocation occurs at runtime using operators such as new in languages like C++ and , ensuring that objects can be created as needed during program execution. References to heap-allocated objects are typically managed via pointers or handles, which store the of the object and enable indirect access without exposing the underlying storage details to the programmer. The internal structure of an object in memory combines its state and behavioral metadata to support core OOP features like encapsulation and polymorphism. Data fields, representing the object's instance variables, are laid out contiguously following an object header that includes essential runtime information. For polymorphism, many implementations incorporate a virtual table (vtable), a shared of function pointers for overridden methods, with each object containing a virtual pointer (vptr) referencing its class's vtable; this enables dynamic method dispatch at runtime. The exact layout, including for alignment and optimization of sub-objects in hierarchies, adheres to language-specific application binary interfaces (ABIs) to ensure compatibility and efficiency. Object lifetime management governs allocation, usage, and deallocation to prevent memory leaks and ensure availability. Creation initializes the object on the heap and sets up its initial state, while destruction reclaims the ; this can occur explicitly through deallocation calls like delete in manual systems or automatically in others. Garbage collection (GC) is a prevalent automatic approach where the runtime identifies and frees unreferenced objects through tracing or marking phases, avoiding manual intervention. Alternatively, maintains a tally of incoming references to each object, decrementing the count on reference release and deallocating when it reaches zero, though it requires careful handling of cycles to avoid leaks. The identity of an object is intrinsically linked to its distinct , distinguishing it from copies or equivalents. In , objects are exclusively allocated on the heap within the (JVM), where the garbage collector automatically manages their lifetime by reclaiming memory from objects no longer reachable from active references, eliminating the need for explicit deallocation and reducing common errors like dangling pointers.

Language-Specific Features

Programming languages exhibit significant variations in how they support and implement objects, ranging from class-based blueprints to prototype delegation and specialized mechanisms for polymorphism. These differences influence syntax, models, and runtime behavior, allowing developers to model entities in ways tailored to the language's paradigm. Class-based languages like and require explicit class definitions to create objects, serving as templates that bundle data and methods. In , objects are instantiated as self-contained block instances from class declarations, which specify local data attributes and associated actions, enabling modular of complex systems. Java extends this approach, where classes act as blueprints for objects; each object is created via a constructor that initializes instance variables (state) and provides methods (behavior), ensuring and encapsulation through access modifiers. All non-primitive types in Java inherit from the root Object class, unifying object handling across the . In prototype-based languages, such as before the introduction of ES6 classes, objects inherit properties and methods directly from prototype objects rather than classes, promoting flexibility and dynamic modification. Pre-ES6 relies on an internal prototype chain, where each object links to a (often set via a constructor's prototype property), and property access traverses this chain for resolution; for instance, creating an object with new Constructor() delegates lookups to the constructor's , simulating without rigid class structures. Smalltalk, originating in the , pioneered a pure object-oriented model where everything—from primitives like integers to classes and the execution environment—is treated as an object, with interactions occurring exclusively through to invoke methods. This uniform treatment fosters a highly dynamic and extensible system. Certain languages incorporate advanced features to enhance object capabilities. C++ permits , enabling a derived class to inherit members from multiple base classes simultaneously, such as combining traits from unrelated hierarchies; however, to avoid ambiguities in shared base classes (e.g., the diamond problem), ensures a single instance of the common base. Go, conversely, uses interfaces to achieve object polymorphism without hierarchies; an interface defines a set of method signatures, and any type (struct or otherwise) implicitly implements it by providing those methods, allowing diverse objects to be used interchangeably based on behavioral compatibility.

Historical Development

Origins in Early Languages

The concept of objects in emerged in the as an extension of earlier procedural languages, particularly through the integration of structures and procedures to model complex systems. In languages like , records provided a means to group related , while separate subroutines handled operations on that , laying groundwork for associating code with in a more cohesive manner. These features served as proto-objects, allowing programmers to simulate entity behaviors without full encapsulation, though they required manual coordination between and procedures. This blending of procedures with data records found its initial realization in , developed at the Norwegian Computing Center to address the needs of simulation programming. , created by and between 1962 and 1964, extended by introducing mechanisms to describe interacting components in discrete event simulations, such as industrial processes or physical systems. The language treated simulation entities as dynamic units that combined local data and associated actions, enabling more natural modeling of real-world objects like machines or vehicles in a program. The pivotal advancement came with Simula 67 in 1967, which formalized classes as templates for creating objects and introduced the term "object" to denote instances of these classes within simulation contexts. Nygaard and Dahl derived the term from discrete event simulation modeling, where an object represented an active entity with its own state and behavior, interacting over time in a modeled environment. This innovation allowed simulations to be expressed as hierarchies of such entities, marking the birth of object-oriented concepts while remaining rooted in simulation applications.

Evolution in Modern OOP

The popularization of dynamic objects in the 1970s and early 1980s is largely attributed to Smalltalk, developed at Xerox PARC from 1972 to 1980, which implemented a pure object-oriented model where all entities, including primitives, are treated as objects communicating via . This approach emphasized runtime flexibility and influenced the conceptual foundation for later languages by demonstrating objects' viability for interactive systems and graphical user interfaces. Building on this, C++ emerged in 1985 under at , extending the procedural C language with core OOP features like classes, , and to support large-scale without sacrificing performance. The 1990s marked a phase of standardization, with the (UML) developed in the mid-1990s by , James Rumbaugh, and , and adopted by the in 1997 as a graphical notation for specifying, visualizing, and documenting object-oriented designs. Concurrently, the 1994 book Design Patterns: Elements of Reusable Object-Oriented Software by , Richard Helm, Ralph Johnson, and John Vlissides (the "Gang of Four") cataloged 23 reusable patterns, including the for ensuring a single instance of a class, which became foundational for structured OOP implementation. Java's release in 1995 by further propelled adoption, introducing platform-independent objects through compilation to bytecode executed on the Java Virtual Machine (JVM), enabling "write once, run anywhere" across diverse hardware. In contemporary applications, objects underpin through the (DOM), a tree-structured interface representing and XML documents as manipulable objects for dynamic content updates. Similarly, in mobile ecosystems, Apple's Swift language, introduced in 2014, leverages objects via classes and protocols for app development, integrating OOP with and concurrency to streamline and . Despite these advances, modern OOP faces challenges from performance overheads, such as in method dispatch and memory allocation for objects, which can degrade efficiency in resource-constrained or high-throughput environments compared to procedural alternatives.

References

  1. https://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/concepts/object.html
  2. https://www.clear.rice.edu/comp310/JavaResources/cnx/objects_classes.html
  3. https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~byoung/cs303e/slides7-objects-classes.pdf
  4. https://engineering.purdue.edu/ECN/Support/KB/Docs/ZopeBook/ObjectOrientation.whtml
  5. https://web.eecs.utk.edu/~bvanderz/cs302/notes/oo-intro.html
  6. http://cs.furman.edu/~tallen/csc475/materials/objOrientedHist.pdf
  7. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/221496180_What_is_Object-Oriented_Programming
  8. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/234313.234415
  9. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/323779.323751
  10. https://dl.acm.org/doi/pdf/10.1145/2462476.2466532
  11. https://opendsa-server.cs.vt.edu/ODSA/Books/Everything/html/IntroOO.html
  12. https://www.cs.utexas.edu/~wcook/papers/OOPvsADT/CookOOPvsADT90.pdf
  13. https://web.eecs.utk.edu/~bvanderz/cs302/notes/inheritance.html
  14. https://introcs.cs.princeton.edu/java/faq/c2java.html
  15. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/960112.28702
  16. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Encapsulation-and-inheritance-in-object-oriented-Snyder/a65b714dbb7287665ecf547f4296023ee498ac67
  17. https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/java/access-modifiers-java/
  18. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/604131.604156
  19. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/encapsulation-type
  20. https://realpython.com/python-property/
  21. https://realpython.com/python-getter-setter/
  22. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/960112.28739
  23. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265794037_Concepts_of_Object-Orientation
  24. https://www.vldb.org/conf/1997/P366.PDF
  25. https://bertrandmeyer.com/wp-content/uploads/OOSC2.pdf
  26. https://web.mit.edu/java_v1.0.2/www/tutorial/java/objects/object.html
  27. https://web.stanford.edu/class/cs193j/handouts_old/03OOPConcepts.pdf
  28. https://www.slac.stanford.edu/pubs/slacpubs/5500/slac-pub-5629.pdf
  29. https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/csharp/programming-guide/classes-and-structs/using-constructors
  30. https://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKayOnMessaging
  31. https://courses.cs.washington.edu/courses/cse374/21au/lectures/lecture21.pdf
  32. https://www.haskell.org/definition/haskell2010.pdf
  33. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/1624775.1624804
  34. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/674162
  35. https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jvms/se8/html/jvms-2.html
  36. https://www.stroustrup.com/bs_faq2.html
  37. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1925844.1926395
  38. https://www.oracle.com/webfolder/technetwork/tutorials/obe/java/gc01/index.html
  39. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1111596.1111597
  40. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/800025.1198392
  41. https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/dahl_6917600.cfm
  42. https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.5555/944331.944338
  43. https://spectrum.ieee.org/qa-adele-goldberg-on-the-legacy-of-smalltalk
  44. https://www.cs.tufts.edu/comp/105-2020f/homework/small.html
  45. https://cplusplus.com/info/history/
  46. https://www.omg.org/spec/UML
  47. https://developer.apple.com/swift/
  48. https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/737990
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.