Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #41390
| Date | 2013-03-17 20:53 -0700 |
|---|---|
| Subject | Message passing syntax for objects |
| From | Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.python |
| Message-ID | <mailman.3406.1363578805.2939.python-list@python.org> (permalink) |
Hello, I just posted an answers on quora.com about OOP (http://qr.ae/TM1Vb) and wanted to engage the python community on the subject. Alan Kay's idea of message-passing in Smalltalk are interesting, and like the questioner says, never took off. My answer was that Alan Kay's abstraction of "Everything is an object" fails because you can't have message-passing, an I/O task, working in the same space as your objects -- they are two very different functionalities and they have to be preserved **for the programmer**. This functional separation made me think that Python could benefit from a syntactical, language-given separation between Classes and the messages between them, to encourage loosely-coupled, modular OOP. Something that OOP has always promised but never delivered. I think we should co-opt C++'s poorly used >> and << I/O operators (for files) and re-purpose them for objects/classes. One could then have within interpreter space, the ability to pass in a message to an object. >>> 42 >> MyObject #sends 42 as a message into MyObject The Object definition would then have special methods __in__ to receive data and a special way of outputing data that can be caught __str__(?). I'm hoping the community can comment on the matter.... Thanks, Mark Tacoma, Washington
Back to comp.lang.python | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Message passing syntax for objects Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-03-17 20:53 -0700 Re: Message passing syntax for objects Tim Harig <usernet@ilthio.net> - 2013-03-18 07:06 +0000
csiph-web