Which option best describes Object-oriented programming?

Which option best describes Object-oriented programming?

• A. Designing a program by discovering objects, their properties, and their relationships.
• B. A programming style that focuses on data flow.
• C. A paradigm that uses only functions.
• D. A language that translates to assembly.

Answer: (A)

Object-oriented programming focuses on modeling software as a set of interacting objects that bundle data with behavior. The design process starts by identifying the things in the problem domain—objects—their properties (attributes) and how they relate to one another. This leads to organizing code around classes as blueprints and objects as instances, with relationships such as containment, inheritance, and polymorphism that enable reuse and flexible design. This approach aligns best with designing a program by discovering objects, their properties, and their relationships. Describing data flow centers on how information moves through operations rather than modeling entities; a paradigm that uses only functions points to functional programming; and a language that translates to assembly speaks to low-level implementation targets rather than the design approach of the paradigm.

Object-oriented programming focuses on modeling software as a set of interacting objects that bundle data with behavior. The design process starts by identifying the things in the problem domain—objects—their properties (attributes) and how they relate to one another. This leads to organizing code around classes as blueprints and objects as instances, with relationships such as containment, inheritance, and polymorphism that enable reuse and flexible design. This approach aligns best with designing a program by discovering objects, their properties, and their relationships.

Describing data flow centers on how information moves through operations rather than modeling entities; a paradigm that uses only functions points to functional programming; and a language that translates to assembly speaks to low-level implementation targets rather than the design approach of the paradigm.