Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #22971 > unrolled thread

Final Fantasy 2 based game source code

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.java.programmer

Contents

  Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Turtle Wizard <elvishNOSPAM.healer@gmail.com> - 2013-03-19 22:26 +0100
    Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-03-19 18:49 -0700
      Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Fredrik Jonson <fredrik@jonson.org> - 2013-03-20 07:18 +0000
        Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-03-20 20:28 +1100
          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Fredrik Jonson <fredrik@jonson.org> - 2013-03-20 13:34 +0000
            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-03-20 12:07 -0700
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-20 20:26 -0400
                Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-03-21 08:11 +0000
                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-03-21 20:58 +1100
                Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-03-21 12:29 -0700
                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-21 20:34 +0000
                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-21 17:56 -0400
                    Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Lew <lewbloch@gmail.com> - 2013-03-21 15:24 -0700
                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-22 09:18 +0000
                    Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-03-22 07:15 -0300
                      Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-22 13:54 +0000
                        Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-03-22 10:25 -0700
                          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-22 18:14 +0000
                            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-03-22 13:22 -0700
                              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-22 20:26 +0000
                                Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2013-03-22 13:32 -0700
                                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-22 21:39 +0000
                                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-03-23 08:50 +1100
                                    Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2013-03-22 23:26 +0100
                                      Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-03-23 09:39 +1100
                                      Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-22 20:15 -0400
                          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-22 20:12 -0400
                        Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-22 20:08 -0400
                          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-03-23 10:59 +0000
                            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-03-23 15:33 +0000
                    Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-03-22 10:19 -0500
                      Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-22 16:57 +0000
                        Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-03-22 14:07 -0500
                          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-22 20:09 +0000
                            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-22 20:31 -0400
                              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-23 08:54 +0000
                            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-03-23 23:01 -0500
                              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-24 10:04 +0000
                                Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-03-24 17:07 -0300
                                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-25 09:19 +0000
                              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-25 09:26 +0000
                          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-22 20:49 -0400
                          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Chris Uppal" <chris.uppal@metagnostic.REMOVE-THIS.org> - 2013-03-23 11:12 +0000
                            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-23 15:24 +0000
                              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-03-23 16:21 +0000
                                Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-23 17:10 +0000
                                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2013-03-23 18:27 +0000
                                    Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-23 18:51 +0000
                            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arved Sandstrom <asandstrom2@eastlink.ca> - 2013-03-23 22:00 -0300
                        Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-22 20:19 -0400
            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-03-21 14:12 +1100
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-21 09:06 +0000
                Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-03-21 20:57 +1100
                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-21 10:42 +0000
                    Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-03-21 22:11 +1100
                      Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-21 11:53 +0000
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-21 17:58 -0400
          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-20 13:51 +0000
            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joshua Cranmer 🐧 <Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid> - 2013-03-20 09:28 -0500
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-20 15:03 +0000
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-20 20:32 -0400
            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-03-20 17:52 +0100
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-20 17:43 +0000
                Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-03-21 10:01 +1100
                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code lipska the kat <"nospam at neversurrender dot co dot uk"> - 2013-03-21 08:35 +0000
                Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-20 20:35 -0400
          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-20 20:18 -0400
          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Jim Janney <jjanney@shell.xmission.com> - 2013-03-22 18:00 -0600
            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code "Qu0ll" <Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com> - 2013-03-23 11:08 +1100
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-22 20:26 -0400
        Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-03-20 12:41 +0100
          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code paul.cager@gmail.com - 2013-03-20 05:59 -0700
            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-03-20 17:49 +0100
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2013-03-20 20:33 +0100
                Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-03-20 23:15 +0100
                  Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Lars Enderin <lars.enderin@telia.com> - 2013-03-21 00:11 +0100
                    Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-03-21 00:27 +0100
          Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-20 20:39 -0400
            Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2013-03-21 10:01 -0700
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2013-03-21 17:39 -0400
              Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code Joerg Meier <joergmmeier@arcor.de> - 2013-03-22 01:21 +0100
      Re: Final Fantasy 2 based game source code bubble <bubble@soft29.vub.ac.be> - 2013-03-24 14:16 +0000

Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next page →

#23113

On 24/03/13 22:34, Stefan Ram wrote:
> =?UTF-8?B?Sm9zaHVhIENyYW5tZXIg8J+Qpw==?=<Pidgeot18@verizon.invalid>  writes:
>> We're discussing an abstract programming concept so by the term
>> "abstract interface" here I meant to refer to the theoretical concept
>> rather than the Java specific term. Although it turns out that Java's
>> interfaces map very nicely to abstract interfaces and vice versa.
>
>    The definition of »Java interface« we get from the JLS.
>    What is an »abstract interface

As I see it it's a rhetorical observation that we are discussing 
interfaces in the most general terms without limiting ourselves to the 
well defined and possibly limiting semantics of the Java interface 
archetype. It's an abstraction of an abstraction. My original objection 
to the term was a mistake.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23086

On 3/22/2013 3:07 PM, Joshua Cranmer 🐧 wrote:
> On 3/22/2013 11:57 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>> "I don't know what more you think object-oriented is, at the basic level"
>>
>> One of the key ideas behind OO is the concept of information hiding. We
>> hide the state of an Object and restrict the available interactions on
>> that state by publishing a contract. Simply put, the contract is the set
>> of methods that clients can call. I see this as absolutely fundamental
>> to the idea of an Object. My C code did not exhibit this property,
>> anyone can directly manipulate the state (the pointer to pointer to
>> struct node) bypassing the published interface of push() pop() and
>> top(). My example does however meet the following criteria
>
> If you don't elaborate the struct in a header file, then people can't
> bypass the interface.

In many libs the opaque context patterns are widely used.

Illustration:

foobar.h
--------

#ifndef FOOBAR_H
#define FOOBAR_H

typedef void *FOOBAR_CTX;

void foobar_init(FOOBAR_CTX *ctx);
void foobar_set_v(FOOBAR_CTX ctx, int v);
int foobar_get_v(FOOBAR_CTX ctx);
void foobar_destroy(FOOBAR_CTX ctx);

#endif

foobar.c
--------

#include <stdlib.h>

#include "foobar.h"

struct FOOBAR
{
     int v;
};

void foobar_init(FOOBAR_CTX *ctx)
{
     *ctx = malloc(sizeof(struct FOOBAR));
}

void foobar_set_v(FOOBAR_CTX ctx, int v)
{
     ((struct FOOBAR*)ctx)->v = v;
}

int foobar_get_v(FOOBAR_CTX ctx)
{
     return ((struct FOOBAR*)ctx)->v;
}

void foobar_destroy(FOOBAR_CTX ctx)
{
     free(ctx);
}

which nicely encapsulates the definition.

It can be combined with function pointers if necesarry.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23092

Joshua Cranmer ?? wrote:
> If you don't elaborate the struct in a header file, then people can't
> bypass the interface. Your complaint boils down to "C doesn't provide
> access control, so it can't be OOP"--by that logic, languages like
> JavaScript, Ruby, or Python can't be object-oriented.

I agree.  "Information hiding" covers two concepts, only one of which is a
necessary pre-condition for OO.

If by "information hiding" we mean that implementation details /don't matter/
to the user of the objects -- and so they won't bother to look (or at least not
to make their production code use irrelevant details) then that is a key part
of OO.  You Just Don't Care (tm).

If by "information hiding" we mean that the language /polices/ a policy of /not
letting/ people see the innards of the objects, then, while that is a perfectly
reasonably language design decision, it is /only/ a language design decision.
It affects the flavour of the language, but does is irrelevant to whether the
language is suitable for OO programming.

(By the way, a stronger argument, IMO, for /not/ regarding the C-based stuff as 
"true OO" is that C lacks GC -- the longer I work in OO the more I move towards 
seeing GC as /essential/ since without it the objects don't have full autonomy. 
That's not part of the popular/consensus view of OO, though.)

    -- chris 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23093

On 23/03/13 11:12, Chris Uppal wrote:
> Joshua Cranmer ?? wrote:

[snip]

>
> If by "information hiding" we mean that the language /polices/ a policy of /not
> letting/ people see the innards of the objects, then, while that is a perfectly
> reasonably language design decision, it is /only/ a language design decision.
> It affects the flavour of the language, but does is irrelevant to whether the
> language is suitable for OO programming.

I can't say I've had any experience of these types of languages. I've 
not used them but apparently Smalltalk and Ruby only allow access to 
object state via methods but AFAIAA they are both considered OO by the 
language community at large. Do you have any examples of such languages 
that are not considered OO languages?

> (By the way, a stronger argument, IMO, for /not/ regarding the C-based stuff as
> "true OO" is that C lacks GC -- the longer I work in OO the more I move towards
> seeing GC as /essential/ since without it the objects don't have full autonomy.
> That's not part of the popular/consensus view of OO, though.)

That's an interesting thought, not sure I understand what you mean by 
'full autonomy' though. If you mean 'self-governance' then as I see it a 
fully self governing Object would be the ideal situation. With GC, 
Objects can't be self governing as they would be collected by a 
secondary entity, namely the Garbage Collector, they would have no say 
in the matter. A fully autonomous Object on the other hand would inform 
the runtime system that it was no longer required and return it's 
resources to the pool. Euthanasia versus suicide if you like. A fully 
autonomous Object wouldn't have any binding relationships, how could it, 
it wouldn't be autonomous. A fully autonomous Object could collaborate 
with others to perform tasks but would not be in any way dependent on 
others for it's existence, it would in effect be a independent entity, 
give it self awareness and we have attained computational nirvana or the 
living nightmare of truly intelligent machines. Or maybe you mean 
something different ... fascinating though though.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23095

On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 15:24:32 +0000, lipska the kat wrote:

> On 23/03/13 11:12, Chris Uppal wrote:
>> Joshua Cranmer ?? wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> 
>> If by "information hiding" we mean that the language /polices/ a policy
>> of /not letting/ people see the innards of the objects, then, while
>> that is a perfectly reasonably language design decision, it is /only/ a
>> language design decision. It affects the flavour of the language, but
>> does is irrelevant to whether the language is suitable for OO
>> programming.
> 
> I can't say I've had any experience of these types of languages. I've
> not used them but apparently Smalltalk and Ruby only allow access to
> object state via methods but AFAIAA they are both considered OO by the
> language community at large. Do you have any examples of such languages
> that are not considered OO languages?
>
Perl, which supports an OO programming style but without introducing any 
OO-specific syntax for defining or using objects, classes or methods. 
Chapter 12, Objects in the O'Reilly 'Camel' book, "Programming Perl", has 
a concise description of the Perl approach to OOP.

Python uses a similar approach though it uses a 'class' declaration and 
the 'self' attribute qualifier though the latter is used rather 
differently to its use in Java.  

In both languages its entirely up to the programmer whether object 
definitions are encapsulated in separate source files or just mixed in 
with procedural code in the same source file.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23096

On 23/03/13 16:21, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 15:24:32 +0000, lipska the kat wrote:
>
>> On 23/03/13 11:12, Chris Uppal wrote:
>>> Joshua Cranmer ?? wrote:

[snip]

>
> Python uses a similar approach though it uses a 'class' declaration and
> the 'self' attribute qualifier though the latter is used rather
> differently to its use in Java.

I've actually investigated Python in the past. I must say that it is 
laughably easy to write stuff in that language, I ended up with simple 
client server setup in about 12 lines of code. The need to explicitly 
pass the self reference to every function got bit wearing but it was the 
only way (apparently) to access the state. I'm still not convinced about 
duck type polymorphism though. It's just so ... weird.

Once I was properly aware of Python it soon became apparent that it is 
surprisingly widely used and was about well before Java.

We had an interesting discussion in one of the Python groups about the 
'object orientedness' of Python, several correspondents appeared to 
agree that a better description might be 'object based' but I'm not 
about to get into a religious war about that one :-)

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23097

On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 17:10:57 +0000, lipska the kat wrote:

> On 23/03/13 16:21, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>> On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 15:24:32 +0000, lipska the kat wrote:
>>
>>> On 23/03/13 11:12, Chris Uppal wrote:
>>>> Joshua Cranmer ?? wrote:
> 
> [snip]
> 
> 
>> Python uses a similar approach though it uses a 'class' declaration and
>> the 'self' attribute qualifier though the latter is used rather
>> differently to its use in Java.
> 
> I've actually investigated Python in the past. I must say that it is
> laughably easy to write stuff in that language, I ended up with simple
> client server setup in about 12 lines of code. The need to explicitly
> pass the self reference to every function got bit wearing but it was the
> only way (apparently) to access the state. I'm still not convinced about
> duck type polymorphism though. It's just so ... weird.
> 
> Once I was properly aware of Python it soon became apparent that it is
> surprisingly widely used and was about well before Java.
> 
> We had an interesting discussion in one of the Python groups about the
> 'object orientedness' of Python, several correspondents appeared to
> agree that a better description might be 'object based' but I'm not
> about to get into a religious war about that one :-)
>
I wouldn't even go that far - to me its OO features look more like they 
were bolted on as an afterthought than forming a foundation but of course 
ymmv.

I got to the stage of writing simple stuff in it but haven't taken it any 
further, partly because its (lack of) backward compatibility between 
language versions looks like an obstacle to long-term program 
maintenance. That said, I like the idea of indentation rather than begin/
end or curly brackets to indicate block structure but am not wild about 
its object structure. I also like the extensive 3rd party libraries, 
though to call the documentation for some 'minimal' is being too kind.
However, I may end up making a bit more use of it since it is the 
recommended development language for the RaspberryPi, though currently I 
prefer to use C.


-- 
martin@   | Martin Gregorie
gregorie. | Essex, UK
org       |

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23098

On 23/03/13 18:27, Martin Gregorie wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 17:10:57 +0000, lipska the kat wrote:
>
>> On 23/03/13 16:21, Martin Gregorie wrote:
>>> On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 15:24:32 +0000, lipska the kat wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 23/03/13 11:12, Chris Uppal wrote:

[snip]


> I also like the extensive 3rd party libraries,
> though to call the documentation for some 'minimal' is being too kind.

Sshhh, don't say that too loudly, I had the misfortune to point out that 
the language documentation was a little ... sparse in places.

Big mistake, lots of ... attitude, however I did manage to get a 
particularly aggravating documentation bug listed for attention but my 
offers of help with the documentation in general were ignored.

Ho Hum!

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23099

On 03/23/2013 08:12 AM, Chris Uppal wrote:
[ SNIP ]

> (By the way, a stronger argument, IMO, for /not/ regarding the C-based stuff as
> "true OO" is that C lacks GC -- the longer I work in OO the more I move towards
> seeing GC as /essential/ since without it the objects don't have full autonomy.
> That's not part of the popular/consensus view of OO, though.)
>
>      -- chris

What I think is important is that you can clearly define your object 
lifetimes. GC is not even an OO concept, it's automated reclaiming of 
memory no longer used by a program. C has garbage collectors available too.

If you implement OO in C in such a way that it's clear what object 
lifetimes are, that's what matters. IMO.

AHS

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23083

On 3/22/2013 12:57 PM, lipska the kat wrote:
> On 22/03/13 15:19, Joshua Cranmer 🐧 wrote:
>> On 3/22/2013 4:18 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>>> On 21/03/13 19:29, Lew wrote:
>>>> Arne Vajhøj wrote:
>>>>> Lew wrote:
>>>>>> Fredrik Jonson wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>>> According to you then this is Object Oriented ... interesting
>>> interpretation.
>>
>> It is object-oriented, just very messy since C doesn't support the OOP
>> paradigm very well.
>>
>> For more examples of object-oriented programming in C, you could look at
>> the GObject libraries,
>
> All very interesting I'm sure.
>
> However
>
> I've been thinking about Arveds question
>
> "I don't know what more you think object-oriented is, at the basic level"
>
> One of the key ideas behind OO is the concept of information hiding. We
> hide the state of an Object and restrict the available interactions on
> that state by publishing a contract. Simply put, the contract is the set
> of methods that clients can call. I see this as absolutely fundamental
> to the idea of an Object. My C code did not exhibit this property,
> anyone can directly manipulate the state (the pointer to pointer to
> struct node) bypassing the published interface of push() pop() and
> top(). My example does however meet the following criteria
>
> "... to collect behaviors into types with attributes, and operate on
> objects of those types.
>
> To write OO code I need an OO language.

No.

OO is a style that can be done in practically any language.

The syntax may be more elegant if the language was designed
to make OOP easy.

>                                    Of course that's not to say that
> just because you use an OO language your code is OO and that you can't
> approximate OO in a non OO language ... of course ultimately you may
> argue that everything that can be done can be done in assembler, well
> OK, you write your next business system in assembler, I'll use Java.
> Would you like to bet who would finish first

That is not the issue under discussion.

> The bottom line is that an Object Oriented language like Java provides
> me with the tools to write code that exhibits the three main properties
> desirable of Object Oriented Software
>
> Encapsulation (supported by information hiding), inheritance and
> polymorphism.
>
> Anything that doesn't exhibit these properties isn't OO IMHO

You can do that in C.

> That is why I believe that the statement
>
> "Object oriented means to collect behaviors into types with attributes,
> and operate on objects of those types"
>
> doesn't even begin to cover what "Object oriented means"

It certainly begins to cover it.

I may need some additions to be complete.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23007

"Fredrik Jonson"  wrote in message 
news:slrnkkjeng.ps1.fredrik@biggles.jonson.org...

> It isn't my code. I don't know who the original poster is, and I'm not
> familiar with his projects. I just had to call out on Lew's tone.

Sorry for mistaking you for the OP Fredrik - my bad.

Anyway, my point is simply that Lew's tone is probably not worth fussing 
over.  He contributes a lot to this group, has a high level of knowledge and 
even admits when he is wrong (which admittedly is quite rare).  I do believe 
that he means no harm and that he's not a bully.  My assessment is that he 
practices a kind of "tough love" approach where he uses colourful language 
and shows a bit of attitude in an attempt to motivate the recipient of his 
advice to be a better developer.

If someone is offended by his remarks then they will most likely struggle in 
the real world.

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me] 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23015

On 21/03/13 03:12, Qu0ll wrote:
> "Fredrik Jonson" wrote in message
> news:slrnkkjeng.ps1.fredrik@biggles.jonson.org...
>
>> It isn't my code. I don't know who the original poster is, and I'm not
>> familiar with his projects. I just had to call out on Lew's tone.
>
> Sorry for mistaking you for the OP Fredrik - my bad.
>
> Anyway, my point is simply that Lew's tone is probably not worth fussing
> over. He contributes a lot to this group, has a high level of knowledge
> and even admits when he is wrong (which admittedly is quite rare). I do
> believe that he means no harm and that he's not a bully. My assessment
> is that he practices a kind of "tough love" approach where he uses
> colourful language and shows a bit of attitude in an attempt to motivate
> the recipient of his advice to be a better developer.

What a complete load of bollocks.

> If someone is offended by his remarks then they will most likely
> struggle in the real world.

Do you actually *believe* this rubbish or are you just trolling c.l.j.p

Despite what a few deluded souls have stated here and from past 
experience I find that enthusiasm is the best aid to education.

Negativity imprints on the student a desire to do something else.
Enthusiasm for one's subject is a far better spur to the reluctant 
neophyte than trashing their code will ever be.

I don't know what dark corner of some sad reality you inhabit but where 
I come from, someone who has been encouraged to think for themselves and 
taught using positive reinforcement is far more capable of dealing with 
bullies and mental thuggery than someone who has been beaten into 
submission.

lipska

> -Qu0ll (Rare, due to Darwinian evolution)

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23017

"lipska the kat"  wrote in message 
news:afmdnXSetqoeUNfMnZ2dnUVZ8jednZ2d@bt.com...

>> Anyway, my point is simply that Lew's tone is probably not worth fussing
>> over. He contributes a lot to this group, has a high level of knowledge
>> and even admits when he is wrong (which admittedly is quite rare). I do
>> believe that he means no harm and that he's not a bully. My assessment
>> is that he practices a kind of "tough love" approach where he uses
>> colourful language and shows a bit of attitude in an attempt to motivate
>> the recipient of his advice to be a better developer.
>
> What a complete load of bollocks.

What exactly is bollocks here?  Are you saying I don't know my own 
assessment of Lew?  That you may think differently of Mr. Bloch doesn't 
change my assessment of him.

>> If someone is offended by his remarks then they will most likely
>> struggle in the real world.
>
> Do you actually *believe* this rubbish or are you just trolling c.l.j.p

How could that possibly be confused with trolling?  Lew was quite gentle 
compared with others the OP may encounter during their career.  Seriously 
kitty, if they are offended by Lew's somewhat awkward attempt at help then 
they are going to find many situations very difficult.

> Despite what a few deluded souls have stated here and from past experience 
> I find that enthusiasm is the best aid to education.

And when did I ever say that was not the case?

> Negativity imprints on the student a desire to do something else.
> Enthusiasm for one's subject is a far better spur to the reluctant 
> neophyte than trashing their code will ever be.

And when did I ever say that was not the case?

> I don't know what dark corner of some sad reality you inhabit but where I 
> come from, someone who has been encouraged to think for themselves and 
> taught using positive reinforcement is far more capable of dealing with 
> bullies and mental thuggery than someone who has been beaten into 
> submission.

And when did I ever say that was not the case?

You seem to think that because I tried to explain Lew's modus operandi to a 
newbie that I was suggesting negativity was the best way to help someone.  I 
don't believe that and I never claimed that.  You came to that conclusion 
all by yourself.

It's not much of a stretch to suspect you are simply arguing for the sake of 
arguing in a manner very reminiscent of trolling.

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me] 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23019

On 21/03/13 09:57, Qu0ll wrote:
> "lipska the kat" wrote in message
> news:afmdnXSetqoeUNfMnZ2dnUVZ8jednZ2d@bt.com...

[snip]

> You seem to think that because I tried to explain Lew's modus operandi
> to a newbie that I was suggesting negativity was the best way to help
> someone.I don't believe that and I never claimed that. You came to that
> conclusion all by yourself.

I came to that conclusion because you opined ...

"he practices a kind of "tough love" approach where he uses
colourful language and shows a bit of attitude in an attempt to motivate
the recipient of his advice to be a better developer."

Given that you did not attempt to argue against that approach I can only 
assume you agree with it.

You also drone on about 'coping in the real world'. Presumably you mean 
that being abused gets you used to that sort of behavior so you can 
better cope with it when confronted by the sort of egotistical sad sack 
that infests many a software team. Well I'll tell you something, being 
an arsehole is not a prerequisite of membership of any software team 
that I have anything to do with. The only thing it guarantees is that 
the miscreant gets shown the door a bit sharpish.

> It's not much of a stretch to suspect you are simply arguing for the
> sake of arguing in a manner very reminiscent of trolling.

Well quite

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23021

"lipska the kat"  wrote in message 
news:t4Gdnee6NfJiftfMnZ2dnUVZ8sudnZ2d@bt.com...

> Given that you did not attempt to argue against that approach I can only 
> assume you agree with it.

If this is anything to go by then you must be making a lot of inaccurate 
assumptions in your life.

Tip: Not everyone who opts to not criticise something agrees with it.

> Presumably you mean  that being abused gets you used to that sort
> of behavior so you can better cope with it when confronted by the
> sort of egotistical sad sack that infests many a software team.

There you go again, presuming something that's not at all true.

In no way was I advocating "abuse" (really?) or suggesting that being 
negative was the *best* way to help someone.

I was merely pointing out that Lew is Lew and that there's really no point 
in getting your knickers in a twist over his remarks.  Dozens of people have 
taken Lew to task over his attitude and Lew is still Lew.  Think of him what 
you may but in his defence he does contribute many a valuable post to this 
group.  I advise that it's worth it to ignore the rough old rocks and focus 
on the diamonds.  There's plenty of them.

The OP will no doubt encounter far more venomous characters in their career 
and it is a sad reality that it is sometimes necessary to deal with 
unpleasant people and behaviour.  Given this, I believe it is essential that 
we learn to cope with such people; not because their behaviour is in any way 
justifiable, just because it's a certainty that we will come across them.

> Well I'll tell you something, being an arsehole is not a prerequisite of 
> membership of any software team that I have anything to do with. The only 
> thing it guarantees is that the miscreant gets shown the door a bit 
> sharpish.

Good to know.

--
And loving it,

-Qu0ll (Rare, not extinct)
_________________________________________________
Qu0llSixFour@gmail.com
[Replace the "SixFour" with numbers to email me] 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23023

On 21/03/13 11:11, Qu0ll wrote:
> "lipska the kat" wrote in message
> news:t4Gdnee6NfJiftfMnZ2dnUVZ8sudnZ2d@bt.com...

[snip]

>> Presumably you mean that being abused gets you used to that sort
>> of behavior so you can better cope with it when confronted by the
>> sort of egotistical sad sack that infests many a software team.
>
> There you go again, presuming something that's not at all true.

Oh dear, you really don't have the hang of this yet do you.
Read the above ... OK, now read this.

> I believe it is
> essential that we learn to cope with such people; not because their
> behaviour is in any way justifiable, just because it's a certainty that
> we will come across them.

See where I'm coming from? ... it does sorta seem like you agree with my 
original statement a few lines after stating I falsely presumed such a 
thing ... would you agree?

Anyway, it's not just Lew that exhibits questionable behavior in this 
group although he is certainly the most enthusiastic proponent of "tough 
love" as you put it. I question the need for such behavior full stop. 
That's all I have to say really.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#23050

On 3/20/2013 11:12 PM, Qu0ll wrote:
> "Fredrik Jonson"  wrote in message
> news:slrnkkjeng.ps1.fredrik@biggles.jonson.org...
>
>> It isn't my code. I don't know who the original poster is, and I'm not
>> familiar with his projects. I just had to call out on Lew's tone.
>
> Sorry for mistaking you for the OP Fredrik - my bad.
>
> Anyway, my point is simply that Lew's tone is probably not worth fussing
> over.  He contributes a lot to this group, has a high level of knowledge
> and even admits when he is wrong (which admittedly is quite rare).  I do
> believe that he means no harm and that he's not a bully.  My assessment
> is that he practices a kind of "tough love" approach where he uses
> colourful language and shows a bit of attitude in an attempt to motivate
> the recipient of his advice to be a better developer.
>
> If someone is offended by his remarks then they will most likely
> struggle in the real world.

Sounds very likely.

But I don't think that makes it right.

Arne

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#22978

On 20/03/13 09:28, Qu0ll wrote:
> "Fredrik Jonson" wrote in message
> news:slrnkkiom1.nnr.fredrik@biggles.jonson.org...

[snip]

> I also wanted to add something along the lines of "If you can't stand
> the heat then get out of the kitchen" but I struggled to frame that
> analogy in the terms of software development.

You are an idiot.

There is never an excuse for the invective that issues forth from
the Bloch orifice.

It is perfectly possible to offer good advice without all the personal 
abuse, insults and snide remarks.

The only possible explanation is that he gets some sort of pleasure by 
being such a dick. Or can you offer another reason ?


lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#22979

On 3/20/2013 8:51 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
> The only possible explanation is that he gets some sort of pleasure by
> being such a dick. Or can you offer another reason ?

People remember negative emotions better than positive emotions. So, 
present your comments as a scathing critique, and it will be better 
remembered and applied in the future than a melancholy response. :-)

-- 
Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not 
tried it. -- Donald E. Knuth

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#22982

On 20/03/13 14:28, Joshua Cranmer 🐧 wrote:
> On 3/20/2013 8:51 AM, lipska the kat wrote:
>> The only possible explanation is that he gets some sort of pleasure by
>> being such a dick. Or can you offer another reason ?
>
> People remember negative emotions better than positive emotions. So,
> present your comments as a scathing critique, and it will be better
> remembered and applied in the future than a melancholy response. :-)

I'd probably agree with that, nothing spurs one on more that someone 
trashing your code ... not that anyone has ever trashed my code of 
course :-)

However, a good teacher will always temper a scathing critique with 
positive advice, so, for example.

DO NOT USE RAW TYPES!  YECCCH!

might be tempered with

"using raw types isn't recommended because it bypasses the compile type 
type checking offered by Java generics"

Succinct, simple to understand and provides a hook for further learning.

We'll ignore the fact that Bloch is shouting, something which he has 
roundly lambasted others in the past ...
I'm nothing if not forgiving :-)

Scathing is fine, rude and belittling is never so.

lipska

-- 
Lipska the Kat©: Troll hunter, sandbox destroyer
and farscape dreamer of Aeryn Sun

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 3 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 [3] 4 5  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.java.programmer

csiph-web