The type/object distinction and possible synthesis of OOP and imperative programming languages
Mark Janssen
dreamingforward at gmail.com
Thu Apr 18 22:30:39 EDT 2013
On Thu, Apr 18, 2013 at 7:10 PM, Ned Batchelder <ned at nedbatchelder.com> wrote:
> You won't solve the problem of confusing, ambiguous, or conflicting
> terminology by making up a rule. "Object-oriented" means subtly different
> things to different people.
That's a problem, not a solution.
> It turns out that computing is a complex field
> with subtle concepts that don't always fit neatly into a categorization.
But that is the point of having a *field*.
> Python, Java, Javascript, Ruby, Smalltalk, Self, PHP, C#, Objective-C, and
> C++ are all "object-oriented", but they also all have differences between
> them. That's OK. We aren't going to make up a dozen words as alternatives
> to "object-oriented", one for each language.
Well, you won't, but other people *in the field* already have,
fortunately. They have names like dynamically-typed,
statically-typed, etc.
> You seem to want to squeeze all of computer science and programming into a
> tidy hierarchy.
No on "squeeze" and "tidy". Maybe on "hierarchy".
> It won't work, it's not tidy. I strongly suggest you read
> more about computer science before forming more opinions. You have a lot to
> learn ahead of you.
Okay, professor is it, master? What is your provenance anyway?
> --Ned.
-- :)
--
MarkJ
Tacoma, Washington
More information about the Python-list
mailing list