Re: Why is OO Popular?
From: Alfredo Novoa (alfredo_at_ncs.es)
Date: 05/06/04
- Next message: Robert C. Martin: "Re: Why is OO Popular?"
- Previous message: Alfredo Novoa: "Re: Why is OO Popular?"
- Maybe in reply to: Jeff Brooks: "Re: Why is OO Popular?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 14:34:52 GMT
On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 16:47:09 +0100, Calum <calum.bulk@ntlworld.com>
wrote:
>To speculate on how humans think, we can look to human language. There
>must be a correspondence between human thought and human language, some
>would even say they are inseparable. In natural language, you have
>nouns, verbs and adjectives, which correspond to objects, messages and
>members. Therefore, there is at least some correspondence between OO
>language, human language, and therefore human thought.
>
>OO does not have a monopoly on nouns, verbs and adjectives however. In
>a functional language, a function is perhaps a verb, while values are
>nouns. In a logic language, terms are nouns, while predicates are verbs
>or adjectives.
Good point! OO knows a little about nouns, but but almost nothing
about phrases.
OO is only yet another little step, not the end.
>Logic programming is "better" IMO at modeling the real world, e.g.
Of course, but it is still in a primitive stage due to the conformism
of the masses among other things
>however to implement algorithms using logic programming is IMO less easy
>than in functional/procedural/OO languages. So this isn't the whole
>story either.
Algorithms are low level stuff, but logic and procedural programming
can be used together.
Regards
Alfredo
- Next message: Robert C. Martin: "Re: Why is OO Popular?"
- Previous message: Alfredo Novoa: "Re: Why is OO Popular?"
- Maybe in reply to: Jeff Brooks: "Re: Why is OO Popular?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|