Re: Functions vs OOP

From	Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu>
Subject	Re: Functions vs OOP
Date	2011-09-05 18:55 -0400
References	<j3tjov$c30$1@dont-email.me> <d6c071ac-2def-44a1-baa5-a545d2988def@a10g2000prn.googlegroups.com> <j431q1$rrl$1@dont-email.me>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.783.1315263399.27778.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

On 9/5/2011 1:45 PM, William Gill wrote:
> On 9/4/2011 9:13 AM, rusi wrote:
>> On Sep 3, 9:15 pm, William Gill<nore...@domain.invalid> wrote:
>>> During some recent research, and re-familiarization with Python, I came
>>> across documentation that suggests that programming using functions, and
>>> programming using objects were somehow opposing techniques.
>>
>> Staying with (for the moment) the suggestion that OO-P and F-P are
>> complementary, I believe it is worthwhile to distinguish syntactic OO-
>> P vs F-P from semantic OO-P vs F-P.
>>
>> Syntactically: f(x) is functional x.f() is object oriented.
>> Semantically if f's return value depends only on x ie does not depend
>> on state it is functional (in the math sense) -- the jargon is that f
>> is referentially transparent.
>
> Not to split hairs, but syntactically f(x) is a function in many
> programming paradigms.
>
> As I understand it functional programming places specific requirements
> on functions, i.e.referential transparency. So f(x) may or may not be
> "functional".

In Python, it may be a parameterized procedure. Some languages separate 
functions and procedures (also called subroutines). Python does not. 
(Or you could say that it makes procedures into functions with 
side-effects by returning None by default).

> x.f() is also a function, but it is a member of the object x, is
> referred to as a 'method' of x, and uses the syntactical "dot" notation
> object"dot"function for identification.
>
>> Referential opaqueness is usually such a source of problems that it
>> turns out good to contain the problem somewhat -- hence the wish for
>> encapsulation.
>>
>> One can find in the python library itself all 4 combinations:
>> syntactically and semantically OO : sort
>> syntactically and semantically FP: sorted
>> syntactically OO semantically FP: join
>


-- 
Terry Jan Reedy

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

Thread

Functions vs OOP William Gill <noreply@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-03 12:15 -0400
  Re: Functions vs OOP Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-09-04 02:25 +1000
    Re: Functions vs OOP Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-09-03 15:15 -0400
      Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <noreply@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-03 17:34 -0400
        Re: Functions vs OOP Ben Finney <ben+python@benfinney.id.au> - 2011-09-04 07:39 +1000
          Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <nospam@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-03 17:58 -0400
        Re: Functions vs OOP Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-09-03 21:51 -0400
          Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <noreply@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-03 22:18 -0400
    Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <nospam@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-05 14:58 -0400
  Re: Functions vs OOP MRAB <python@mrabarnett.plus.com> - 2011-09-03 17:29 +0100
    Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <noreply@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-03 17:09 -0400
  Re: Functions vs OOP Ian Kelly <ian.g.kelly@gmail.com> - 2011-09-03 12:50 -0600
    Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <noreply@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-03 17:13 -0400
    Re: Functions vs OOP tinnews@isbd.co.uk - 2011-09-04 09:13 +0100
      Re: Functions vs OOP Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-09-04 21:18 +1000
      Re: Functions vs OOP Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-09-04 14:32 -0400
        Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <nospam@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-04 15:43 -0400
          Re: Functions vs OOP Steven D'Aprano <steve+comp.lang.python@pearwood.info> - 2011-09-05 09:41 +1000
            Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <nospam@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-04 20:46 -0400
            Re: Functions vs OOP Chris Angelico <rosuav@gmail.com> - 2011-09-05 10:59 +1000
  Re: Functions vs OOP rusi <rustompmody@gmail.com> - 2011-09-04 06:13 -0700
    Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <noreply@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-05 13:45 -0400
      Re: Functions vs OOP Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmichel@sequans.com> - 2011-09-05 21:04 +0200
        Re: Functions vs OOP William Gill <nospam@domain.invalid> - 2011-09-05 20:30 -0400
      Re: Functions vs OOP Terry Reedy <tjreedy@udel.edu> - 2011-09-05 18:55 -0400

csiph-web