Re: Message passing syntax for objects | OOPv2

References	<CAMjeLr_eJf1Aboz=2+oti4TOV=oejUYVo7K4zks+Ck4CSHaqpg@mail.gmail.com> <5167F327.3030803@nedbatchelder.com> <CAMjeLr8+pr12+0mN0SOrtg9ZTkNq=PiqxWyqB8CxpJ0BT=sxJA@mail.gmail.com> <mailman.1475.1368066966.3114.python-list@python.org> <518b3699$0$11120$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>
Date	2013-05-09 14:41 -0700
Subject	Re: Message passing syntax for objects \| OOPv2
From	Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.1504.1368135695.3114.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

>>  These models of computation should not use the same language.  Their
>> computation models are too radically different.
>
> Their computation models are exactly equivalent.

No they are not.  While one can find levels of indirection to
translate between one and the other, that doesn't mean they're
equivalent.  It's like saying that because I can make an equivalence
between the complex plane and the real, that they should be treated as
equivalent.  But they shouldn't -- else you run into a domain error.

-- 
MarkJ
Tacoma, Washington

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

Thread

Re: Message passing syntax for objects | OOPv2 Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-05-08 19:35 -0700
  Re: Message passing syntax for objects | OOPv2 rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-05-08 20:26 -0700
    Re: Message passing syntax for objects | OOPv2 Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-05-08 20:53 -0700
  Re: Message passing syntax for objects | OOPv2 Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-05-09 05:39 +0000
    Alternate computational models can be harmonious (was Message passing syntax for objects | OOPv2) rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-05-09 04:56 -0700
    Re: Message passing syntax for objects | OOPv2 Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-05-09 14:41 -0700

csiph-web