THEORY: OO theories: was: Re: double negatives
|From:||Boudewijn Rempt <bsarempt@...>|
|Date:||Friday, July 23, 1999, 18:12|
On Thu, 22 Jul 1999, Ed Heil wrote:
> Well, I think the situation here is that Object Oriented Programming
> is intended to capture some aspects of human classification.
I have an incurably associative mind - and as soon as I hear about
human classification, I think of all those philosophical languages
that tried to present humanity with the perfect classification of
> It does so -- in a limited way. (Real human classification is
> probably a bit more like an OOP programmer's acid-induced nightmare of
> hideously complex mazes of multiple inheritance, all of which is
> constantly changing in real-time in an ad hoc manner...)
Hmpfr. I don't need no acid for those kind of nightmares. Just a project
with twenty programmers, a programmer replacement rate of two a month
and a few month over schedule. And the cleverly self-modifying kind of
code VB produces.
I was already a bit afraid that there might be object-oriented theories
of language out. I think that what the world needs is more grammars
(and more languages ;-)), not more theories...
Boudewijn Rempt | http://www.xs4all.nl/~bsarempt