[Date Index] [Thread Index] [Author Index]

Re: OOP in Mathematica

• To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
• Subject: [mg29021] Re: OOP in Mathematica
• From: "Hermann Schmitt" <schmitther at netcologne.de>
• Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 01:47:57 -0400 (EDT)
• Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com

Hallo Mr. Kuska,
comment at the end
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jens-Peer Kuska" <kuska at informatik.uni-leipzig.de>
To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
Subject: [mg29021] [mg28992] Re: OOP in Mathematica


> Hi,
>
> > With all respect, I think you might have said "in my opinion."
>
> I have no other opinion than mine.
>
> > OOP is
> > revolutionizing software development, by (among other things) separating
> > implementation from interface, thus allowing modules to interact more
easily
> > and with fewer problems.
>
> That's OOP -- wow! I thought it is good programming style, working
> in every higher programming language.
>
> > Mathematica's "Module[]" facility is a simple
> > embodiment of this idea,
>
> What is with my beloved Block[] - is it also OOP  ?
> Next you will say that patterns are also OOP, and the
> good old pure functions ? Is this object oriented ?
> Fine ! Now I know that LISP and Prolog are native
> object oriented languages !
>
> > by enclosing code blocks and isolating them from
> > their applications, making it possible to change the methods without
> > changing the outer appearance and uses.
>
> You change *functions* not methods! and this is functional programming.
> Since Mathematica does not know what a data type is, the data
> types can't have methods.
Every expression in Mathematica has a "Head" - not only functions -, and I
think the head can be used  as class in OOP.
Hermann Schmitt
> But you can have functions that evaluate special arguments.
>
> Regards
>   Jens
>