Julia is fully object oriented. The core of OO is not to write a dot
between an object and an associated function but that one has virtual
functions. Multiple dispatch provides just that.
Cheers
Tobi
Am Sonntag, 18. Oktober 2015 15:15:50 UTC+2 schrieb Simon Danisch:
>
> This design has at least 3 issues, since you can't have instances of a
> module.
> In general:
> I personally would value the discussion of why Julia needs more OOP
> constructs much more, If one can show that there are terrible flaws in
> Julia's model which are swiftly solvable with OOP.
> My guess is, that the argument "I learned X and can't transfer it to
> Julia, so Julia needs to change", can't really convince anyone to start
> implementing something rather involved.
>
> There are a lot of comments on people trying to bring OOP to Julia, which
> are best summarized by: give Julia's model a chance and don't stick to OOP
> - it will pay off.
> And this kind of comment is pretty understandable in my opinion, since
> Julia is quite a sophistaced language with plenty of constructs to avoid
> OOP.
> I don't see much value in OOP and Julia's multiple dispatch is actually
> one of the things that brought me here ( I exclusively worked with OOP
> languages before).
> Besides the current flaws, I think it's a better model for numerical
> computing, it yields concise code, easier maintenance and it's easier to
> add feature to an existing code base than it is in OOP.
>
> I think Julia should move forward by not mimicking OOP further, but
> instead improve the current model - there's lots to do already.
> Wasting time by chasing after features from other languages will make it
> much harder to turn Julia into a well rounded, sound language. (this only
> applies to feature that get chased without a concrete problem)
>
> Best,
> Simon
>
>
> Am Sonntag, 18. Oktober 2015 14:41:58 UTC+2 schrieb Sisyphuss:
>>
>> When I'm learning Julia, I am always thinking what is the correct way to
>> do OOP in this language. It seems to me that what I learned in C++ does not
>> apply in Julia.
>>
>> It took me long to realize that the equivalent of Class of C++ in Julia
>> is not Type, but Module. Module is the basic function unit in Julia.
>>
>> Thus, a Class in Julia is like
>> module ClassName # class Name {
>> using # include<> // should be outside
>> import # include<>
>> export function # public function;
>> var = 1 # private static var;
>> end # }
>> This provides the same structure as C++.
>>
>> However, this design has two issues:
>> 1) The visit control is not as fine-grained as in C++, the encapsulation
>> is not strict;
>> 2) Variables at the top level of a module are global variables.
>>
>> These two points are closely correlated. If we let module have private
>> variables, then they are not too different from local variables, ans thus
>> can be type inferred.
>> I think this is a natural way to do OOP with Julia.
>>
>>
>>
>>
