CRC: Not unless we wanted, from the very outset, to arrive at the conclusion "FOO bad! MOO good!",
That was not my intention. I would like to nail down the definitions and then move on to pros/cons of each.
Message Object Oriented vs Function Object Oriented
- (JimWeirich)
- (71)
- July 21, 2003, 12:57:05 PM EDT
It's not so much a Language issue...
- (ChrisR)
- (28)
- July 21, 2003, 01:30:46 PM EDT
Mind Games
- (JimWeirich)
- (27)
- July 21, 2003, 03:35:18 PM EDT
The biggest difference is how one treats the interaction
- (ChrisR)
- (26)
- July 21, 2003, 04:30:20 PM EDT
Now a Language Issue again
- (JimWeirich)
- (25)
- July 21, 2003, 04:52:33 PM EDT
Is it "missing methods" or "invalid messages" it handles?
- (CRConrad)
- (23)
- July 21, 2003, 05:04:43 PM EDT
Both.
- (admin)
- (22)
- July 21, 2003, 05:08:28 PM EDT
Sorry, I don't think you quite understood what I meant.
- (CRConrad)
- (21)
- July 21, 2003, 05:28:58 PM EDT
Needlessly pedantic, IMO.
- (admin)
- (20)
- July 21, 2003, 05:32:53 PM EDT
OK, so why don't we do it that way, then...
- (CRConrad)
- (8)
- July 21, 2003, 05:47:53 PM EDT
Lose the chip...
-NT
- (admin)
- (3)
- July 21, 2003, 05:49:48 PM EDT
OK, bye, then. (Heard anything from Addison, lately?)
-NT
- (CRConrad)
- (2)
- July 21, 2003, 06:02:31 PM EDT
Suit yourself.
-NT
- (admin)
- July 21, 2003, 06:03:29 PM EDT
You can do it (new thread)
- (orion)
- July 21, 2003, 07:41:37 PM EDT
FOO bad. MOO good.
- (ChrisR)
- (2)
- July 21, 2003, 06:12:31 PM EDT
Mooooooo.
-NT
- (admin)
- July 21, 2003, 06:16:14 PM EDT
Re: FOO bad. MOO good.
- (JimWeirich)
- July 21, 2003, 06:31:36 PM EDT
Re: OK, so why don't we do it that way, then...
- (JimWeirich)
- July 21, 2003, 06:35:39 PM EDT
Method VS Message
- (JimWeirich)
- (10)
- July 21, 2003, 06:42:26 PM EDT
Sure.
-NT
- (admin)
- July 21, 2003, 06:56:59 PM EDT
Re: Method VS Message
- (tuberculosis)
- (8)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:42:37 AM EDT
Re: Method VS Message
- (deSitter)
- (7)
- July 21, 2003, 11:42:24 PM EDT
Didn't you finish that smalltalk history doc Todd showed us?
- (FuManChu)
- (1)
- July 22, 2003, 12:49:34 AM EDT
Re: Didn't you finish that smalltalk history doc Todd showed
- (deSitter)
- July 22, 2003, 12:59:53 AM EDT
In theory yes, in practice no
- (bluke)
- (4)
- July 22, 2003, 06:01:52 AM EDT
You must cheat - but you must not get caught
- (tuberculosis)
- (3)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:44:33 AM EDT
Yes exactly
- (bluke)
- (2)
- July 22, 2003, 10:31:22 AM EDT
Hmmm sounds as if
- (Ashton)
- (1)
- July 22, 2003, 09:19:49 PM EDT
Not *so* clever
- (tuberculosis)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:51:46 AM EDT
At that level, it is a language issue...
- (ChrisR)
- July 21, 2003, 05:32:00 PM EDT
DoesNotUnderstand
- (tuberculosis)
- (6)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:42:14 AM EDT
Reified Messages
- (JimWeirich)
- (1)
- July 21, 2003, 06:50:52 PM EDT
Sounds about right to me
-NT
- (tuberculosis)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:42:32 AM EDT
Re: DoesNotUnderstand
- (deSitter)
- (3)
- July 21, 2003, 11:45:13 PM EDT
nil is an object
-NT
- (admin)
- (2)
- July 22, 2003, 08:04:50 AM EDT
Re: nil is an object
- (deSitter)
- (1)
- July 22, 2003, 10:07:10 AM EDT
Re: nil is an object
- (bluke)
- July 22, 2003, 10:49:10 AM EDT
ICLRPD
- (static)
- July 21, 2003, 10:53:46 PM EDT
It is a fundamental difference
- (bluke)
- (30)
- July 22, 2003, 05:56:45 AM EDT
More Questions
- (JimWeirich)
- (9)
- July 22, 2003, 06:28:12 AM EDT
Re: More Questions
- (bluke)
- (3)
- July 22, 2003, 07:23:18 AM EDT
Re: More Questions
- (JimWeirich)
- (2)
- July 22, 2003, 07:54:36 AM EDT
It relates more to the mindset
- (bluke)
- July 22, 2003, 08:03:03 AM EDT
In past discussions with Freep...
- (ChrisR)
- July 22, 2003, 09:52:34 AM EDT
Where does polymorphism fit in?
- (static)
- (1)
- July 22, 2003, 08:42:30 AM EDT
Polymorphism via inheritance/interface
- (ChrisR)
- July 22, 2003, 09:37:43 AM EDT
Example
- (tuberculosis)
- (1)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:45:22 AM EDT
Re: Example
- (JimWeirich)
- July 22, 2003, 11:45:27 AM EDT
Statically Typed Smalltalk
- (tuberculosis)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:45:29 AM EDT
Statically Typed MOO
- (JimWeirich)
- (19)
- July 22, 2003, 10:41:22 AM EDT
The other possible avenue
- (ChrisR)
- (18)
- July 22, 2003, 10:47:24 AM EDT
Do you know how they do that?
- (bluke)
- (17)
- July 22, 2003, 10:54:10 AM EDT
Compiler generates the necessary calls
- (ChrisR)
- July 22, 2003, 11:02:54 AM EDT
AspectJ is code generation
- (tuberculosis)
- (15)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:46:10 AM EDT
A comment and a question ...
- (JimWeirich)
- (12)
- July 22, 2003, 02:19:07 PM EDT
Not really
- (tuberculosis)
- (11)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:46:27 AM EDT
Pushing the limits of Blanchard's Law
- (JimWeirich)
- (10)
- July 22, 2003, 03:57:21 PM EDT
I don't think the basic argument is so much
- (ChrisR)
- (8)
- July 22, 2003, 04:09:32 PM EDT
Re: I don't think the basic argument is so much
- (JimWeirich)
- (7)
- July 22, 2003, 04:35:10 PM EDT
Should probably let Todd defend his Laws....but.... :-)
- (ChrisR)
- (6)
- July 22, 2003, 05:03:54 PM EDT
Still sounds arbitrary ...
- (JimWeirich)
- (5)
- July 22, 2003, 05:14:31 PM EDT
On par with "Eval"
- (ChrisR)
- (1)
- July 22, 2003, 05:20:45 PM EDT
Well said
-NT
- (tuberculosis)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:51:08 AM EDT
No its not
- (tuberculosis)
- (2)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:51:13 AM EDT
Ok, I get it.
- (JimWeirich)
- (1)
- July 22, 2003, 07:48:18 PM EDT
Yep
-NT
- (tuberculosis)
- Aug. 21, 2007, 05:51:33 AM EDT
Oh yeah
- (FuManChu)
- July 22, 2003, 04:28:15 PM EDT
What is your reasoning for this "law"?
- (ben_tilly)
- (1)
- Sept. 21, 2003, 05:20:53 PM EDT
OT re: coming to this thread late
- (drewk)
- Sept. 22, 2003, 10:32:55 AM EDT
Litmus Test
- (JimWeirich)
- (1)
- July 22, 2003, 07:03:41 AM EDT
Yes and No
- (bluke)
- July 22, 2003, 07:34:46 AM EDT
Interesting comp.lang.smalltalk thread on this
- (bluke)
- July 22, 2003, 08:16:51 AM EDT