Re: Objects comparaison ?

From	Antony Scriven <adscriven@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.javascript
Subject	Re: Objects comparaison ?
Date	2011-10-19 17:14 -0700
Organization	http://groups.google.com
Message-ID	<f7c63000-087f-4228-a960-60dac143bb8b@n13g2000vbv.googlegroups.com> (permalink)
References	(9 earlier) <659c944b-9ab1-46e9-a360-dd2b2f373dd4@c1g2000vbw.googlegroups.com> <07b4ce23-b2f9-4412-a50c-42f0043f8bc0@m4g2000yqm.googlegroups.com> <13cf344d-d143-4515-8170-9cf46a8c1cde@m1g2000vbm.googlegroups.com> <7456f8c2-ee81-4d3d-a7df-f452f0a6e62b@t10g2000yqd.googlegroups.com> <b954ae6d-0b32-442d-b549-1bc1994eb48b@w23g2000vbx.googlegroups.com>

Show all headers | View raw

On Oct 20, 12:41 am, "Michael Haufe (TNO)" wrote:

 > [...]
 >
 > My issue is the organization of the language, and adding all of
these
 > static members doesn't help. [...]

Gah, I'm probably starting to sound like Thomas Lahn, but
they're not static! I know what you mean though.

 > A better organization the language should have strived
 > for is to embrace more of its SmallTalk/Self background
 > than some type of mixture of half-assed functional.

Hmm, Smalltalk was strongly influenced by Lisp:
http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~ram/pub/pub_jf47ht81Ht/doc_kay_oop_en

 > I feel it sits in an awkward place between the two (plus
 > Java syntax didn't help of course).

Only because of its target audience, I believe it was originally
implemented as a Scheme interpreter.

 > Sure, it has first-class functions, but you can't write
 > true functional code as any ML/Lisp family programmer
 > will tell you.

In what sense?

 > OO is also awkward due to verbosity and not everything
 > being an object. In comparison to its relatives, the
 > layout of the inheritance model is pretty slapdash due to
 > its history.

That's why we now have Object.create().

 > [...]
 >
 > So IME, populating Object, Number, and so on with more
 > and more static members is a perpetuation of design
 > smell.

They're anything but static. I do get the impression you're
thinking in class-based terms.

 > The objects are being treated like namespaces or generic
 > placeholders for things the awkward language organization
 > disallowed putting elsewhere

There are probably mistakes there as you say. But objects
hold stuff. And functions are first class stuff in
javascript. How could you not have a placeholder holding
stuff in a prototypal language?

 > (and the backwards
 > compatibility demon of course).

Yes, that does make things awkward.

 > We have Object.create, soon maybe Function.create and
 > Array.create according to the mailing-list. Do these not
 > bother you?

What's the point of Function.create? (And don't say 'to create
a function'!) The point of Object.create is not so much to
create a new object (you can do that already with {}), but to
set up the prototype chain.

 > Why Date.parse instead of new Date?

Because 'new' is for class-based languages?

 > Why not new Json(...)? Each of these are rhetorical
 > questions in themselves, but taken as a whole I think the
 > issue is clear.

Sorry, I don't see the issue. Rather I see more of an issue
with having 'new' at all.

 > On to my off-the-cuff code examples: If the language
 > hypothetically decided to embrace its OO roots and clean
 > up the inheritance model things may look similar to some
 > of the examples, more specifically the concept of
 > "specificObjectType.releventMember".

Yes, but there's more than one OO (or inheritance) model.

 > What methods go where and their behavior is less
 > important in relation to having a consistent means of
 > expressing code.  I could ramble on, but this is a topic
 > better suited to a blog entry or a separate thread*
 > methinks. Things are getting off-topic enough already.
 > Enough with my droning.
 >
 > *No doubt someone will jump on my use of the word
 > "thread" here...

Separate threads don't seem to be a feature in
comp.lang.javascript. :-) --Antony

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Objects comparaison ? unbewusst.sein@fai.invalid (Une Bévue) - 2011-10-13 20:20 +0200
  Re: Objects comparaison ? "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2011-10-13 21:47 +0300
    Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-13 21:21 +0200
      Re: Objects comparaison ? "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2011-10-13 22:40 +0300
        Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-13 21:46 +0200
          Re: Objects comparaison ? dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2011-10-13 13:11 -0700
            Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-14 01:26 +0200
              Re: Objects comparaison ? dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2011-10-14 12:41 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-15 21:37 +0200
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Antony Scriven <adscriven@gmail.com> - 2011-10-15 15:51 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2011-10-15 21:28 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-16 11:41 +0200
                Re: Objects comparaison ? dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2011-10-16 09:05 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-16 21:59 +0200
                Re: Objects comparaison ? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2011-10-17 10:53 +0100
                Re: Objects comparaison ? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2011-10-17 07:02 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Andreas Bergmaier <andber93@web.de> - 2011-10-17 16:27 +0200
                Re: Objects comparaison ? dhtml <dhtmlkitchen@gmail.com> - 2011-10-17 21:28 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-18 11:12 +0200
                Re: Objects comparaison ? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2011-10-18 15:23 +0100
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-18 19:48 +0200
                Re: Objects comparaison ? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2011-10-19 17:08 +0100
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-20 23:58 +0200
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Antony Scriven <adscriven@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 15:46 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-18 10:55 +0200
                Re: Objects comparaison ? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2011-10-18 15:59 +0100
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-18 19:33 +0200
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2011-10-18 14:05 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2011-10-18 16:51 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2011-10-18 17:21 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2011-10-19 04:40 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2011-10-19 16:41 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Antony Scriven <adscriven@gmail.com> - 2011-10-19 17:14 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2011-10-19 18:33 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2011-10-23 11:43 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Antony Scriven <adscriven@gmail.com> - 2011-10-19 15:32 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2011-10-19 16:54 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Antony Scriven <adscriven@gmail.com> - 2011-10-19 17:32 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2011-10-19 18:39 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2011-10-19 16:32 +0100
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2011-10-19 14:18 -0700
                Re: Objects comparaison ? Antony Scriven <adscriven@gmail.com> - 2011-10-19 15:46 -0700
                Objects comparison ? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2011-10-20 16:28 +0100
                Re: Objects comparison ? Antony Scriven <adscriven@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 12:23 -0700
                Re: Objects comparison ? Antony Scriven <adscriven@gmail.com> - 2011-10-20 15:04 -0700
                Re: Objects comparison ? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2011-10-21 15:38 +0100
                Re: Objects comparison ? Andreas Bergmaier <andber93@web.de> - 2011-10-22 19:40 +0200
                Re: Objects comparison ? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2011-10-23 11:49 +0100
                Re: Objects comparison ? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2011-10-24 19:00 +0200
                Re: Objects comparison ? Scott Sauyet <scott.sauyet@gmail.com> - 2011-10-21 05:29 -0700
                Re: Objects comparison ? John G Harris <john@nospam.demon.co.uk> - 2011-10-21 16:30 +0100
            Re: Objects comparaison ? Jukka Lahtinen <jtfjdehf@hotmail.com.invalid> - 2011-10-18 18:06 +0300
              Re: Objects comparaison ? Jake Jarvis <pig_in_shoes@yahoo.com> - 2011-10-18 17:43 +0200
      Re: Objects comparaison ? unbewusst.sein@fai.invalid (Une Bévue) - 2011-10-14 06:11 +0200
        Re: Objects comparaison ? "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2011-10-14 08:07 +0300
          Re: Objects comparaison ? unbewusst.sein@fai.invalid (Une Bévue) - 2011-10-14 07:31 +0200
            Re: Objects comparaison ? "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> - 2011-10-14 08:59 +0300
              Re: Objects comparaison ? unbewusst.sein@fai.invalid (Une Bévue) - 2011-10-14 08:36 +0200
        Re: Objects comparaison ? unbewusst.sein@fai.invalid (Une Bévue) - 2011-10-14 08:35 +0200

csiph-web