Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)



--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."
"Rick Smith" <ricksmith@xxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:13uqi1couu5v915@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

"Howard Brazee" <howard@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:v7equ3lkg1j5o37uo0hv76l7209kk82arm@xxxxxxxxxx
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 13:10:05 -0500, "Rick Smith" <ricksmith@xxxxxxx>
wrote:

I believe it was to divorce their design from programming terms. Of
course, that didn't last.

Why is "to divorce their design from programming terms"
[used previously, assumed] not "[h]ubris and arrogance"?

Because language can carry prejudice. They wanted a blank slate that
in the new analysis. Why should that be hubris and arrogance?

Sometimes starting over can give insight if we don't carry too much
baggage with us.

Starting over can hide fundamental truths behind superficial
untruths!

You might consider the comments in
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Syntactic_sugar >.
-----
Syntactic sugar is a term coined by Peter J. Landin for additions
to the syntax of a computer language that do not affect its
functionality but make it "sweeter" for humans to use. Syntactic
sugar gives the programmer (designer, in the case of specification
computer languages) an alternative way of coding (specifying) that
is often more practical, more conducive to a better programming
style, or more natural to read. However, it does not typically affect
the expressiveness of the formalism or permit the language to do
something new.
[...]
Object-oriented programming

The C programming language is fully capable of object-oriented
programming using its facilities of function pointers, type casting,
and structures. However, languages such as C++ make
object-oriented programming more convenient by introducing
syntax specific to this coding style. Moreover, the specialized
syntax works to emphasize the object-oriented approach to new
programmers. Features of the C# programming language, such as
properties and interfaces, similarly do not enable new functionality
but instead make specific programming practices more prominent
and more natural.
-----

And consider, from COBOL, that there is no _fundamental_
difference among program, function, and method definitions--
they do the same things and may be reused in another context
by changing the identifying text: "program", "method", or
"function", to one of the others.

Now, if one calls "structures" "objects" and calls "procedures"
"methods", this is not truly a "new" paradigm; but is a new,
or rather a different, way of thinking about the same paradigm:
"performing procedures on data".

Bottom line: If it reduces to, "they are called objects and
methods, because we say so" ("we" referring to the "originators
of object orientation"); then hubris and arrogance seem an
appropriate observation.

Well written, Rick, but this is a fine example of ITSA when it should be
ITSLIKE. The subtleties here are everything.

"Structures" are NOT "objects" and there therefore is a good reason for not
retaining the procedural nomenclature; neither are "procedures" "methods",
just because on the surface they appear to be similar.

A horse is not a camel, despite both of them having a leg at each corner and
being used for transport.

I see neither hubris nor arrogance in the selection of a different
nomenclature to describe something that IS different.

Pete.
--
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."




.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Soup=E7on_of_cedilles_and_aper=E7us?=
    ... and a better programming language almost immediately. ... and the inferior design became the "de facto industry ... the committee that designed Algol 58. ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: c++ documentation
    ... > more advanced competence in the language. ... > programming and object-oriented programming. ... There's design and design. ... My point was that the books also describe the *use* of those libraries, ...
    (comp.os.linux.development.apps)
  • Re: regarding "perils of java schools"
    ... design patterns. ... Beyond the C++ language itself, I expect a programmer to have more ... Your original message also mentioned "Network programming." ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: regarding "perils of java schools"
    ... design patterns. ... Beyond the C++ language itself, I expect a programmer to have more ... Your original message also mentioned "Network programming." ...
    (comp.programming)
  • Re: DirectX in HLA
    ... I guess that you have a great knowledge of DirectX ... > understanding by looking at them in assembly language... ... > actually represents, really, is a means to "undo" the OOP so ... > is NOT an "OOPL" (object-orientated programming language), ...
    (comp.lang.asm.x86)