Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!feeder.news-service.com!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed5.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=rO2v9WRE2d0FNiOTHTO5I8bdMV3Du0j5YaysX9cuUPR2MCJFMxt1e1ZQgt9yQVcJBi bZ/FJVTf+7JARLupsp8zIinZbnIjXbIlXJD0Fcw6ZC8boslunGpKMvVg3sEt8LSe0sCs BxeEo/9BMd1T+HS1ql52HzAHV8e4ZlNTyPVkM=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <8kylp.4903$yp3.4046@newsfe09.iad>
References: <4d7cbfcb$0$29971$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <mailman.1175.1300888311.1189.python-list@python.org> <JfVkp.5068$sS4.4758@newsfe11.iad> <4d94326c$0$30003$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <R1elp.6224$sP1.5155@newsfe07.iad> <mailman.85.1301677576.2990.python-list@python.org> <y_xlp.24978$tL6.16271@newsfe03.iad> <mailman.119.1301720798.2990.python-list@python.org> <8kylp.4903$yp3.4046@newsfe09.iad>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 17:17:43 +1100
Subject: Re: Guido rethinking removal of cmp from sort method
From: Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com>
To: python-list@python.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: list
Newsgroups: comp.lang.python
Message-ID: <mailman.121.1301725067.2990.python-list@python.org>
Lines: 66
NNTP-Posting-Host: 82.94.164.166
Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.python:2439

On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 4:17 PM, harrismh777 <harrismh777@charter.net> wrote=
:
> Chris Angelico wrote:
>>
>> Why this lengthy discussion on whether Python is object-oriented or
>> not? What difference does it make?
>
> =A0 =A0 Great question... glad you asked...!
>
>> But bad things sometimes have to happen. And that's why things are
>> versioned.
>
> =A0 =A0 You didn't read the post... cmp removal is a bad thing, and it do=
es not
> need to, =A0and should not have to =A0happen.

I agree that removal of a feature like that is a bad thing. But the
whole point of this thread is the question of whether or not it should
have happened (or rather, whether or not it should be undone).

> =A0 =A0Wrong... one of the reasons for OOP in the first place ( OOA&D ) i=
s to
> ensure that BAD THINGS DO NOT HAPPEN. =A0Code reuse and stability are key=
...
> and OOA&D helps to make sure that works.

So it's perfectly acceptable for bad things to happen in a
non-object-oriented library, but as soon as it works with objects, it
has to eschew badness? This does not make sense.

> =A0 =A0You need to read Grady Booch... and study a little OOP design eith=
er
> using SmallTalk, or C++, to get an appreciation maybe for what is at stak=
e
> here.

I've been a C++ programmer for nearly twenty years. I think I know a
few things about OOP. Actually, I've done OOP in non-OO languages;
most notably, plain old C. The OS/2 Presentation Manager class
hierarchy (SOM) is primarily implemented in C, for instance. My point
is that "object orientation" is completely separate from
"implementation is separate from interface".

> =A0 =A0 You may not have enough knowledge to understand what I'm talking =
about.
> =A0Forgive me.

Maybe I don't. Let me check my character sheet...

Skill, Ranks, Ability, Total modifier
Knowledge (Arcana): 19 + 4 =3D 23
Knowledge (History): 11 + 4 =3D 15
Knowledge (Nature): 2 + 4 =3D 6
Knowledge (The Planes): 0

Not sure where Knowledge (OOP) comes in there. Must ask my DM some day.

Seriously though: I've programmed various systems, where the division
of "interface" and "implementation" come in quite different places; my
favorite being networking, where the interface is the comms protocol,
and everything else is implementation. Objects don't come into it.

But this is getting seriously off-topic; none of this connects with
the cmp=3D parameter.

Chris Angelico