IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Well ...
I did understand it all the first time through. But only because it's exactly the same as in PHP. Except that php doesn't enforce most of the rules of private, static, etc until php5.

But my little rant up there was in response to someone's insistance -- no, I don't remember whose -- that everything in java is an object.
===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
New They're wrong.
The existence of primitives falsifies that claim immediately.

As far as the VM is concerned, everything that you *use* (apart from primitives) is an object. How you access them varies according to instance calls vs. static calls.

Sounds like PHP has Java Envy...
Regards,

-scott anderson

"Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
New I'd say parallel development
Shows the difference between an OSS project and a corporate gig. Java started with a design. PHP grew up from a hack.
===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
New I dispute that claim
Java started as a hack - a toy language to run in VCRs and such.

Since it was meant to be a throwaway, not a lot of thought went into it I think.



"The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."     --Albert Einstein

"This is still a dangerous world. It's a world of madmen and uncertainty and potential mental losses."     --George W. Bush
New Exactly.
I usually summarize my view of Java something like this: "Java was some one's neat little school project that other people took entirely too seriously and foisted upon more people who didn't deserve to be so encumbered."
bcnu,
Mikem

Eine Leute. Eine Welt. Ein F\ufffdhrer.
(Just trying to be accepted in the New America)
New History of PHP in question
Shows the difference between an OSS project and a corporate gig. Java started with a design. PHP grew up from a hack.

My impression is that OOP was added on to PHP as an afterthought because one of the cofounders of it does not think much of OOP. As PHP became more popular, more people wanted Java-like OOP capabilities, perhaps out of habit.

Similarly the originators of Java didn't give much thought to meta abilities in Java, and the later changes to add it seem hacky to many. It is a matter of priorities of the originators.
________________
oop.ismad.com
New PHP started as less then a scripting language
The first version of PHP was just a way to embedd server side tags in pages for things like hit counters.

People wanted more and more features added, till somebody eventually added an IF tag and the race was off to create a real languages.

As PHP was used for more and more complex projects, the capacity for OO programming was more desirable.

OO is overkill for a lot of trivial web projects. But if you need to create a truely complex and powerful system, it is a big advantage.

There is a reason PHP is on version 5 when most other languages only have two or three versions no matter how old they are.

Jay
New Them 'er fightin' words
OO is overkill for a lot of trivial web projects. But if you need to create a truely complex and powerful system, it is a big advantage.

Yeah right. Wherezduproof. Let's not go there today.
________________
oop.ismad.com
New I think PHP's upgrades are just practical.
I've done some things in PHP4 that butted up against what the language could do with objects. V5 largely moves those fences further out. For example: PHP4 has class functions, but no class variables. This is a distinct lack. V5 remedies that.

Wade.

Is it enough to love
Is it enough to breathe
Somebody rip my heart out
And leave me here to bleed
 
Is it enough to die
Somebody save my life
I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary
Please

-- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne.

Expand Edited by static Jan. 13, 2005, 12:15:54 AM EST
New By "class variables" you mean "static" class variables?
===

Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link|http://DocHope.com|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats].
[link|http://DocHope.com|http://DocHope.com]
New Er, yes.
As opposed to instance (or object) variables. The PHP terminology calls them class functions and object functions. I think I picked up "instance variables" from Smalltalk.

Putting aside any potential puns, that is.

Wade.

Is it enough to love
Is it enough to breathe
Somebody rip my heart out
And leave me here to bleed
 
Is it enough to die
Somebody save my life
I'd rather be Anything but Ordinary
Please

-- "Anything but Ordinary" by Avril Lavigne.

New What to say if someone says that...
Ask them what methods you can call on 1 in Java.

As Scott was getting at, 1 is a primitive, not an object.

By contrast in a TRUE object-oriented language like Smalltalk or Ruby, 1 IS an object and you CAN call methods on it. Heck, in Ruby if you want you can even add methods to class FixNum and then call them on individual numbers.

Cheers,
Ben
I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother)
     Tilting at windmills: classes vs objects - (drewk) - (35)
         Er, no. - (admin) - (14)
             Well ... - (drewk) - (11)
                 They're wrong. - (admin) - (9)
                     I'd say parallel development - (drewk) - (5)
                         I dispute that claim - (tuberculosis) - (1)
                             Exactly. - (mmoffitt)
                         History of PHP in question - (tablizer) - (2)
                             PHP started as less then a scripting language - (JayMehaffey) - (1)
                                 Them 'er fightin' words - (tablizer)
                     I think PHP's upgrades are just practical. - (static) - (2)
                         By "class variables" you mean "static" class variables? -NT - (drewk) - (1)
                             Er, yes. - (static)
                 What to say if someone says that... - (ben_tilly)
             Nit - (dshellman) - (1)
                 Actually, that's not a nit - (admin)
         a class is a type of object - (daemon) - (2)
             It's tables all the way down. :-) - (ChrisR) - (1)
                 ICLRPD (new thread) - (Steve Lowe)
         Very astute observation - (tuberculosis)
         Re: Tilting at windmills: classes vs objects - (systems) - (15)
             I suspected that programming would eventually converge - (Ashton)
             Do you honestly believe that this is from TCL??? - (ben_tilly) - (13)
                 Amen - (broomberg)
                 Re: Do you honestly believe that this is from TCL??? - (systems) - (11)
                     think you had better be a developer - (daemon) - (3)
                         Funny; I was thinking the opposite ;) -NT - (FuManChu) - (2)
                             Ive met lots of developers that have no clue - (daemon)
                             Neither - (broomberg)
                     Let me get this straight - (ben_tilly) - (5)
                         very loud VD (clap clap clap) -NT - (daemon)
                         Then let me elaborate - (systems) - (3)
                             "Systems", you should meet Bryce. Bryce, this is "Systems". -NT - (CRConrad)
                             BTW, "Systems": Lay off the exclamation marks. Have some ... - (CRConrad)
                             You sound like the Rincewind of programming -NT - (ben_tilly)
                     For scripting, TCL is poo. -NT - (pwhysall)

A vacation you’ll talk about for years to come, at AA meetings.
100 ms