Fw: Re: oo system for Mathematica
- To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net
- Subject: [mg46295] Fw: [mg46249] Re: [mg46223] oo system for Mathematica
- From: schmitther at t-online.de (Hermann Schmitt)
- Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 21:57:01 -0500 (EST)
- Sender: owner-wri-mathgroup at wolfram.com
Hello Richard, first, it must be unterstood, that oo has to be compared with Mathematica packages not with application programs, a fact, that is often misunderstood. With oo you use classes as you use packages in procedural programming. Oo has primarily to do with the organization of the code. Many think, that you get better and a more understandable organization of the code with oo than with procedural programming. The use of oo offers features not present with procedural programming: - you can create objects, which may be stored on external media and accessed later on in other programs. - oo has an explicit feature for the support of code reuse: inheritance. - in the special case of my system, oo makes record definitions possible, even with arrays. Hermann Schmitt ----- Original Message ----- From: "Richard Palmer" <mapsinc at bellatlantic.net> To: mathgroup at smc.vnet.net Subject: [mg46295] [mg46249] Re: [mg46223] oo system for Mathematica > Dear Hermenn, > > I downloaded your code and documentation. The documentation and code seem > to be well done. > > I have the following question to you and others who might read the post. > What inherently mathematical uses (or math programming uses) do you see for > OO technology? > > I can see the graphics uses for the capability. I understand the > information hiding capabilities of OO facilitate large scale > multi-programmer projects. As a very good programmer, I understand what OO > is trying to do. What I don't understand is how it makes Mathematica significantly > better. > > Richard > > On 2/12/04 7:15 AM, "Hermann Schmitt" <schmitther at t-online.de> wrote: > > > www.schmitther.de >