On 4/4/07, Paul D. Fernhout <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just came across these links (bearing indirectly on the value of > Python emphasizing both procedural and Object-Oriented Programming > support as a language good for beginners and experts): > > See: > "Object Oriented Programming Oversold!" > http://oop.ismad.com/ > Or: > "Guide To Myths" > http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/myths.htm > > And: > "Why I Prefer Procedural/Relational Over OOP" > http://www.geocities.com/tablizer/whypr.htm
Yeah, studied that guy's website some years ago, including some correspondance as I recall. An old custom database programmer like me, xBase family, rebelling against the OO trend which subsequently took over xBase as well starting 1990s or so (witness Microsoft VFP). What a lot of this analysis neglects is the rich *interactive* semantics we're able to define using dot notation, i.e. by making our objects "top level" we have a lot of functionality organized by "thing" (as in "I am a vector"). IDLE 1.2 >>> from stickworks import Vector >>> v1 = Vector((1,0,0)) >>> v2 = Vector((0,1,0)) >>> v1.cross(v2) Vector @ (0.0,0.0,1.0) >>> v2.dot(v2) 1.0 is simply an intuitive way to keep vector ops "grouped" within the entities which have a "need to know" (encapsulation). A rich command line experience is what Python provides. You'd think B. Jacobs would appreciate that, given the xBase "dot prompt" heritage. http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/oopalgebra.html http://www.4dsolutions.net/ocn/trends2000.html Kirby _______________________________________________ Edu-sig mailing list [email protected] http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/edu-sig
