Re: Re: OO in Mathematica
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg37503] Re: [mg37473] Re: [mg37458] OO in Mathematica
- From: "Hermann Schmitt" <schmitther at netcologne.de>
- Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2002 03:30:21 -0500 (EST)
- References: <200211010642.BAA11239@smc.vnet.net>
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
Mathematica is primarily a system for doing interactive computations, OO is not suitable for those cases, at least directly, but classes could be a substitute for packages. If you store above menhtioned computions in order to avoid reenter, this is not a case for OO, either. But Mathematica is - in my eyes - one of the best programming languages and also applicable beyond Mathematical computations. There are no facilities for building GUI's and working with databases, but J/Link makes it possible to use these facilities in Java. It makes not much sense that invent the wheel again, for theses facilities. As I consider Mathematica a very good programming language, it makes sense to program larger applications in Marthematica, and then OO comes into the play. Hermann Schmitt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andrzej Kozlowski" <andrzej at tuins.ac.jp> To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net Subject: [mg37503] [mg37473] Re: [mg37458] OO in Mathematica > But you are yourself describing precisely this "contrast"! Moreover, > the "contrast" between function oriented programming and object > oriented programming was not invented on this list but is well known > and quite often discussed. See for example the discussion in Part II of > "Mastering Mathematica" by J.W. Grey, particularly the section entitled > "The Duality between Functions and Data", or various discussions in > books on CLOS (object oriented common Lisp). What you are saying is in > fact exactly the approach taken in CLOS. But it is also pretty sure > that not everybody using Mathematica needs the kind of data and > program structuring that object oriented programming provides, in fact > I am pretty sure the majority of Mathematica users do not (the > majority of users do not even need the existing "package" mechanism). > It does not mean of course you should not develop your OOP package; in > fact I am quite keen to try it when it becomes available. > > Andrzej Kozlowski > > > > On Thursday, October 31, 2002, at 06:40 PM, Hermann Schmitt wrote: > > > Hello, > > There is a tendency to see a contrast between OO and Mathematica. In my > > opinion this makes no sense: > > OO descibes a method for structuring programs and the data related to > > the > > programs. Mathemtica describes the instructions with which programs > > may be > > built. > > Hermann Schmitt > > > > > > > > > > > >
- References:
- Re: OO in Mathematica
- From: Andrzej Kozlowski <andrzej@tuins.ac.jp>
- Re: OO in Mathematica