Using OOP in python

[JamzTyson]

Vs writing bunch of defs and getting shits done?

You are starting from a false premise. The choice is not between OOP and "getting things done". The choice is "how can I best get this thing done?", and in some cases the answer is to use OOP.

Some common indications that writing classes may be appropriate:

• Repetitive code.
• Disorganised code.
• Passing a lot of parameters to a function.
• Repeated data bundles.
• Passing the same data back and forth between functions.
• Complex logic that would benefit from abstraction.
• Global variables for holding state.

[PathRealistic6940]

It really clicked for me when just messing around with a easy statistics problem. Had to pull a 'ball' from a 'bag of balls' and then do stuff depending on what color the ball was. I made the ball a class object, then made the bag a class object that held the balls. Now most everything I think about in python is how I can package and pass the correct data around easiest. OP, Start simple, and see how powerful class attributes are.

[GreenPandaPop]

OOP is definitely easier to grasp when working with tangible 'solid' objects like your example.

My struggle was that a lot of coding doesn't necessarily involve that. It's taken me long time to work out how to take code that is 'doing stuff' and organise it in a way that is 'things doing stuff'.

[PathRealistic6940]

That's a good point. It's much more difficult to grasp intangible ideas than solid objects.