Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- From: Robert <no@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Mar 2008 23:19:59 -0600
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:01:10 -0700 (PDT), Alistair <alistair@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 29 Mar, 06:18, tim <T...@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:15:20 +0000, docdwarf wrote:
'Technically' there is even less difference between what you cite and
between A-negative and B-positive human blood... now I'd appreciate it if
you'd keep away from dealing with transfusions.
DD
Ditto. No more than one bit might separate a program that works correctly
and one that fails catastrophically. This is a relevant analogy, because
DNA is code.
Well said Tim. Most DNA is in fact what is called 'Junk DNA' with no
discernable function and with sections repeated without rhyme or
reason.
Orgel and Crick called it "Selfish DNA: The Ultimate Parasite" in this article:
http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/SC/B/C/D/G/_/scbcdg.pdf
DNA does not make protein directly. It encodes mRNA, which goes to a ribosome, where the
protein is actually made. Most DNA doesn't make only one mRNA, it is like a macro that can
make many different RNAs depending on parameters. It often makes short temporary RNA
(stRNA), which in turn makes more stRNA, which eventually makes 'real' mRNA. There are
layers of abstraction and overloading much like programming languages. DNA isn't a simple
protein template, it's a meta language.
Amoeba dubia have 200 times the DNA of humans. The marbled lungfish and a plant named
Fritillaria assyriaca have 40 times as much. It is hard to believe the excess contributes
to the host's survival or complexity. You could regard them as old companies burdened with
parasitic unionized employees who cost and contribute little, or as cultures with an
unusually complex grammar. Why is Mandarin and Russian so much more complex than Spanish?
The message is the same. The answer is historic accident.
.
- References:
- Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- From: Rick Smith
- Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- From: Rick Smith
- Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- From: Pete Dashwood
- Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- From: Alistair
- Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- From:
- Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- From: tim
- Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- From: Alistair
- Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- Prev by Date: Re: Confessions of a CoBOL programmer
- Next by Date: Re: Confessions of a CoBOL programmer
- Previous by thread: Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- Next by thread: Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|