Re: interactive help on the base object

From	Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk>
Subject	Re: interactive help on the base object
Date	2013-12-09 15:06 +0000
References	(2 earlier) <l80g93$e54$1@ger.gmane.org> <mailman.3717.1386476467.18130.python-list@python.org> <52a44afc$0$30003$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <CAMjeLr_cGDRKKeg+rC9KqkPFM9xxK94ixKgT+oK1qg=QzuwB3Q@mail.gmail.com> <CALwzid=_WJE8qOa1F3mjv0Jaw_Z7nc4V8UzONBuTiw1od=fNig@mail.gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.3781.1386601592.18130.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On 09/12/2013 10:12, Ian Kelly wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 4:01 PM, Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Likewise, WITH A COMPUTER, there is a definite order which can't be
>> countermanded by simply having this artifice called "Object".  If you
>> FEE(L)s hadn't noticed (no longer using the insult "foo"s out of
>> respect for the sensativities of the brogrammers), this artifice has
>> just been *called on the floor* with this little innocent question
>> that fired up this discussion again (don't hate the messenger).
>> Again:  people entering the community are pointing out a problem --
>> that Object is both trying to be the BASE and the SUPERclass of all
>> objects.
>
> You're mixing two different terminologies.  Whereas "superclass"
> contrasts with "subclass" and connotes an imaginary spatial
> relationship, "base" contrasts with "derived" (not "top"), which
> pairing does not suggest any spatial relationship at all.  There is no
> inconsistency in that these two words happen to mean the same thing.
>
>>> Likewise it doesn't matter whether we draw class hierarchies from the top
>>> down or the bottom up or even sidewise:
>>
>> Have you caught it by now, friends:  IT MATTERS TO THE COMPUTER.
>
> No, I'm pretty sure the computer doesn't care one whit whether the
> inheritance hierarchy that I scribble on a random sheet of paper
> happens to be represented as top-down, bottom-up, left-right,
> right-left, center-out, ana-kata, or using any other conceivable
> spatial relationship that I may have omitted.  The computer only cares
> (inasmuch as I'm willing to personify it) about the actual *code* that
> I feed into it.  How the programmer abstracts or visualizes that code
> is irrelevant.
>

MASCOT is the One True Way 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modular_Approach_to_Software_Construction_Operation_and_Test

-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask 
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

Thread

interactive help on the base object Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-12-06 17:03 +0000
  Re: interactive help on the base object Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-12-08 13:10 +1300
    Re: interactive help on the base object Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-12-07 19:59 -0500
    Re: interactive help on the base object Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-12-07 20:21 -0800
      Re: interactive help on the base object Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-08 10:33 +0000
        Re: interactive help on the base object Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-12-08 15:01 -0800
          Re: interactive help on the base object Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-09 05:11 +0000
            Re: interactive help on the base object Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-12-09 05:59 -0500
              Re: interactive help on the base object Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-10 03:19 +0000
                Re: interactive help on the base object rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-12-09 20:32 -0800
                Re: interactive help on the base object Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-10 05:10 +0000
                Re: interactive help on the base object rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-12-09 21:16 -0800
                Re: interactive help on the base object Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-12-10 00:31 -0500
                Re: interactive help on the base object Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> - 2013-12-10 06:05 +0000
                Re: interactive help on the base object Roy Smith <roy@panix.com> - 2013-12-10 01:20 -0500
                Re: interactive help on the base object Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-12-10 09:37 +0000
                Re: interactive help on the base object rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2013-12-10 03:51 -0800
                Re: interactive help on the base object alex23 <wuwei23@gmail.com> - 2013-12-11 12:04 +1000
                Re: interactive help on the base object Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-12-10 04:35 -0700
        Re: interactive help on the base object Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-12-09 13:44 +1100
        Re: interactive help on the base object Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-12-08 19:05 -0800
        Re: interactive help on the base object Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2013-12-09 14:17 +1100
        Re: interactive help on the base object Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2013-12-09 03:12 -0700
        Re: interactive help on the base object Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy@yahoo.co.uk> - 2013-12-09 15:06 +0000
      Re: interactive help on the base object Gregory Ewing <greg.ewing@canterbury.ac.nz> - 2013-12-09 12:15 +1300
    Re: interactive help on the base object Ned Batchelder <ned@nedbatchelder.com> - 2013-12-08 07:11 -0500

csiph-web