Gets you Smalltalk

Post #71,600 by tuberculosis 12/30/02 8:15:27 PM 12/30/02 8:50:07 PM Reply	Gets you Smalltalk In that case LISP invented "polymorphism" because it pioneered the idea of "code in data structures". Maybe, can't say. I suspect you are right. I know that LISP and Smalltalk were like Yin and Yang influencing each other - CLOS was inspired by Smalltalk who's VM, GC, and code as data were inspired by LISP and on and on... Most existing relational implementations don't use fixed-cell allocations, thus there is little or no "wasted space" for empty cells. I'm not talking about wasted space for empty cells - I'm talking about it for duplicate copies of implementation rather than using inheritance. If every record in your modem table uses the same hangup routine, then you have redundant data. Database != Slow Compared to memory - there's a factor of several orders of magnitude. What you already presented already has plenty of indirection. I don't see why we need this also. Besides non-trivial "inheritance" is best set-based instead of tree-based. The real world changes in a graph-like fashion, not trees. I agree it complicates the runtime model - but it simplifies the conceptual model by allowing for classification. You can say "this is the same as that except for these". Telephone switch programming is crazy with this technique for both data compression reasons and UI ease of use (you don't want to enter every single setting for every single phone number individually - you'd be at it for years). Besides, trees are graphs. The bottom line is that it is easier to manage such stuff in tables than in programming code. You can see patterns in tables easier than in code. Part of the reason for this is tables allow you to eye the info by both row and column at the same time. A class cannot give you this. It is like the difference between looking at an HTML table (made with "table" tag) rendered in a browser versus the raw HTML code. Classes are like the latter. No, its the other way around. You're writing the indirection on an ad hoc basis. The OO language compilers systematizes (if thats a word) the approach and hides the complexity leaving you with (hopefully) the essentials of your design minus the ugly dispatch tables that make it work. You're doing the same thing that they do, in a less efficient and manual manner. It amounts to preferring assembler over C. C helps you write structured logic, assembler doesn't prevent it, but it doesn't help much either. Anyhow, I'm convinced you do understand it, you just don't like it. Whatever, mission accomplished. Now we never have to bring this topic up again. :-) I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns. Edited by tuberculosis Dec. 30, 2002, 08:50:07 PM EST Expand All History
Post #71,601 by Another Scott 12/30/02 8:19:39 PM Reply	Thanks! 1 topic down, Googolplex-1 to go. :-)
Post #71,870 by tuberculosis 1/1/03 3:37:08 PM Reply	For Bryce, this is pretty much the only topic he discusses over and over and over.... I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #71,895 by tablizer 1/1/03 5:44:13 PM 1/1/03 5:49:31 PM Reply	That is not true I have been known to also rant on HTML P-tags, Remote GUI's (SCGUI), SQL (The COBOL of query languages), alleged cop racial conspiracies, arbitrariness of English, and lost hamsters. ________________ oop.ismad.com Edited by tablizer Jan. 1, 2003, 05:47:50 PM EST Edited by tablizer Jan. 1, 2003, 05:49:31 PM EST Expand All History
Post #71,937 by a6l6e6x 1/1/03 10:18:51 PM Reply	Not to mention sheet music conventions/annotations. :) Alex "No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session."\t-- Mark Twain
Post #71,967 by tuberculosis 1/2/03 5:14:45 AM Reply	Woah - sheet music - I haven't seen that stuff in years... I used to play on the Albuquerque bar circuit. Top 40 you have to learn off the radio. The sheet music is 1) always simplified and 2) comes out months after the tune has peaked if it comes out at all. Standard answer to question "can you sight read" was "why - somebody write something down"? Actually I tried to learn to read several times. But my ears are so good that as soon as I've heard it I just play it - bypassing the painful mental act of visual decoding and translation. I don't suppose I'll ever learn...(sigh). I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #72,053 by Steve Lowe 1/2/03 1:17:41 PM Reply	Playing by ear Playing by ear gives you at least one thing the sheet music cannot: The feel of the song. While I can read sheet music (for some values of read), I do much better when I've got a copy of the song to listen to because I can get more of feel for the groove of the song than is possible using the sheet music alone. ----- Steve
Post #72,098 by Meerkat 1/2/03 6:22:04 PM Reply	ObAol MeToo (tm) I always had (and still have) trouble sight-reading because I play by ear. Back in the days when I was a kiddy and still having piano lessons, when I given a new song I go and program it into my TI 99/4a (the speed at which I could type in a CALL SOUND statement...) so I could figure out what it sounds like. Once I started doing that it was heaps easier to learn the songs I had to play. Not at all helpful WRT my learning how to sight-read, though... John. Busy lad.
Post #72,129 by deSitter 1/2/03 8:58:55 PM Reply	Re: ObAol MeToo (tm) Do you mean "sight read" or "read music"? I can read piano music and more or less hear it - but I can't "sight read" as I understand it for a damn. -drl
Post #72,137 by Meerkat 1/2/03 10:15:55 PM Reply	I can read music, I'm just really slow at it. John. Busy lad.
Post #72,170 by static 1/3/03 4:53:00 AM 1/4/03 4:41:59 AM Reply	That's really interesting. Because I have an ear for the feel of music, but when playing, I still prefer to play from chord charts. OTOH, melody lines I can play at speed from manuscript, though hearing it first is Very Helpful. :-) Then too, I've played from a chord chart cold (in a church band) and the song leader suspected but couldn't be sure that I hadn't played that song before. Wade. Microsoft are clearly boiling the frogs. Edited by static Jan. 4, 2003, 04:41:59 AM EST Expand All History
Post #72,219 by drewk 1/3/03 10:55:19 AM Reply	Speed-reader here Though most musicians would look at drum or percussion music and lose their minds. If you're talking percussion (not counting marimba and other keyboard-like instruments) the notes will generally be all on one line. Or rather each line is a completely different instrument. Often each instrument will have a different-shaped note head. Then there's the stuff they give the guy playing the drum set in a pop/jazz/rock etc. band. It's frequently so over-written it's nearly unplayable. I usually just asked for the lead sheet (for standards, the kind with a melody and chord progression) or a copy of the first trumpet part. Basically give me the melody line and let me figure out what to do with it. === Microsoft offers them the one thing most business people will pay any price for - the ability to say "we had no choice - everyone's doing it that way." -- [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=38978\|Andrew Grygus]
Post #72,467 by deSitter 1/4/03 1:13:52 PM Reply	You're a drummer? Cool! -drl
Post #72,624 by Steve Lowe 1/5/03 2:11:58 AM Reply	I use chord charts a lot I make chord charts from sheet music all the time. I hate trying to turn pages in the midst of a song. I try to memorize as much as I can, but we do so many different songs, and a different set every week. ----- Steve
Post #72,214 by admin 1/3/03 10:31:13 AM Reply	Same here. I can't play for shit from music. I end up memorizing the song more or less before I can play it well. I can play melodies by ear after hearing them once, if I'm paying attention. My son is learning to sight read quite well, thankfully. It's a useful skill to have in addition to playing by ear. Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #72,659 by CRConrad 1/5/03 11:47:43 AM Reply	Todd, Steve, guys - just a well-meaning tip: This kind of thing is exactly what the "As New Topic in" check-box is for. [link\|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode\|Christian R. Conrad] (I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.) Your lies are of Microsoftian Scale and boring to boot. Your 'depression' may be the closest you ever come to recognizing truth: you have no 'inferiority complex', you are inferior - and something inside you recognizes this. - [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=71575\|Ashton Brown]
Post #72,661 by deSitter 1/5/03 11:51:53 AM Reply	CRC, Just a Well Meaning Tip.. "As New Topic" is annoying as hell and more or less ruins the flow of a forum, unless (ab)used as a flame retardant. Who cares if side issues come up? When you are having a beer with your buddies, do you move to a new table when the conversation changes? -drl
Post #72,662 by CRConrad 1/5/03 11:55:45 AM Reply	What's annoying as Hell is pompous know-it-alls, and... ...the fact that I apparently missed checking "As New Topic in" on my previous posting. [link\|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode\|Christian R. Conrad] (I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.) Your lies are of Microsoftian Scale and boring to boot. Your 'depression' may be the closest you ever come to recognizing truth: you have no 'inferiority complex', you are inferior - and something inside you recognizes this. - [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=71575\|Ashton Brown]
Post #72,747 by admin 1/5/03 6:26:30 PM Reply	Bar table load times aren't affected by size of past chat Regards, -scott anderson "Welcome to Rivendell, Mr. Anderson..."
Post #72,755 by deSitter 1/5/03 6:44:30 PM Reply	That's the legitimate use Somehow it seemed more civilized to say "let's move to here". -drl
Post #72,777 by CRConrad 1/5/03 7:19:15 PM Reply	Naah, you're missing the REAL use: Seamlessly "moving" the discussion to "tables" where people who might be very interested are more likely to be "sitting": What about all the people here who might have a burning inteerest in music-sheet-reading, but never wander into the Programming forum? T'would have been nice to them to dump this in Open, or the Water Cooler, or something (Entertainment, perhaps?). Especially since you don't have the hassle, here, of everybody having to physically get up, bring their beers (and other assorted beverages) with them, notifying the waitress of the move if they're running a tab, seeing if there's room at the other "table" to squeeze down their butts, etc, etc. But, fuck, anyone else's convenience but yours isn't something you care all that much about, is it? [link\|mailto:MyUserId@MyISP.CountryCode\|Christian R. Conrad] (I live in Finland, and my e-mail in-box is at the Saunalahti company.) Your lies are of Microsoftian Scale and boring to boot. Your 'depression' may be the closest you ever come to recognizing truth: you have no 'inferiority complex', you are inferior - and something inside you recognizes this. - [link\|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=71575\|Ashton Brown]
Post #72,779 by deSitter 1/5/03 7:22:06 PM Reply	Re: Naah, you're missing the REAL use: Just stating an impression, CRC. No biggie. It's wonderful work. -drl
Post #72,785 by CRConrad 1/5/03 7:38:47 PM Reply	OK, that last point is one we can agree on, at least! :-)
Post #73,023 by tuberculosis 1/6/03 5:56:25 PM Reply	If I had any idea this would be so hot I would have started a new topic. Who knew? I am out of the country for the duration of the Bush administration. Please leave a message and I'll get back to you when democracy returns.
Post #73,119 by Steve Lowe 1/7/03 2:01:02 AM Reply	Well meaning tip Don't run with scissors. ;^) Like Todd said woulda, prolly shoulda, but dinna. ----- Steve
Post #73,145 by CRConrad 1/7/03 9:14:04 AM Reply	Long as you knew you "prolly shoulda", that's all I wanted.
Post #71,679 by tablizer 12/31/02 3:53:20 AM Reply	But I get juiced-up dispatching, et al. [Database != Slow] Compared to memory - there's a factor of several orders of magnitude. Databases don't have to run from disk. For dedicated uses, I agree that some hand-built structure is probably faster. However, when you start looking at the same data from different perspectives (different joins, different keys, etc.), then the DB approach will start to shine. DB's are decathlon athletes, not specific event athletes. (BTW, Oracle is designing a RAM-only RDBMS I hear.) Telephone switch programming is crazy with this technique for both data compression reasons and UI ease of use (you don't want to enter every single setting for every single phone number individually - you'd be at it for years). I did not propose duplication. We would have to study the actual patterns to see what underlying structure and repetition pattern is really there. IMO, too many developers "see" trees where there is not really clean trees. Months or years later one often has to deal with refactoring a lot of code and other shuffling to compensate. I once had to build a special "3D rollup" accounts receivable turnaround tracking and reporting system. The structure looked like a classic roll-up tree at first, but I eventually gave up on the tree idea and found sets worked much better. I admit that it takes more training to get the users (accountants in this case) to understand sets, but lucky I had a smart user for that one. She picked it up in a snap. One is not always that lucky. I will admit that for many humans trees are easier to grok, but they just don't reflect the messiness of the real world that well. Besides, trees are graphs. Yes, but the reverse is not true, and that is the problem. Sets are more general-purpose than trees. You can build trees with sets, but it is much trickier to build non-tree sets with trees. (Did I say that right?) IOW, sets can serve as trees much easier than trees can serve as sets. I say, go with the general-purpose tool rather than marry your design to trees. No, its the other way around. You're writing the indirection on an ad hoc basis. The OO language compilers systematizes (if thats a word) the approach and hides the complexity leaving you with (hopefully) the essentials of your design minus the ugly dispatch tables that make it work. You're doing the same thing that they do, in a less efficient and manual manner. It amounts to preferring assembler over C. I am sorry, but I just don't see this. Again, we would probably have to look at actual patterns of repetition and relationships to see what the ideal approach would be. Besides, the "trick" is to farm off the maintenance of such relationships to an operator or intern so that a programmer does not have to deal with actual data entry of such info. Being in tables we "inherit" off-the-shelf Db features like persistence, joins, multi-user-handling, report writers, RAD screen builders, query languages, table browsers, etc etc etc. How is that for "automatic"? I will agree that my approach may require a little extra "manual dispatch" programming that OO would take care of IF trees were the best sharing shape, but my approach also allows one to use more "juiced-up" dispatching techniques if needed, without major code overhauls. I have seen trees run out of gas at least twice. Even in the off chance repetition patterns stayed tree-shaped, they are still easier to sift and view as tables. The dispatching code only need be written once, but the data (including code references) has to be maintained for a long time. Still a bargain in my book. It is the classic tradeoff between a dedicated niche tool versus a general purpose tool. TOP dispatching is more general purpose, and thus will be a bit more costlier if the need tends to be just one thing. If you only use the cork-screw in your swiss army knife, then you might as well just buy a cork-screw. But the world is usually not tree-shaped in my observation. Thus, add juiced-up dispatching ability to persistence, joins, multi-user-handling, report writers, RAD screen builders, query languages, table browsers, etc. I am not going to give all those up to save 1 line of code per 500 lines. ________________ oop.ismad.com

Welcome to IWETHEY!