Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.python > #41446 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2013-03-18 11:29 -0700 |
| Last post | 2013-03-18 11:29 -0700 |
| Articles | 1 — 1 participant |
Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.python
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: [Python-ideas] Message passing syntax for objects Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-03-18 11:29 -0700
| From | Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2013-03-18 11:29 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: [Python-ideas] Message passing syntax for objects |
| Message-ID | <mailman.3465.1363631342.2939.python-list@python.org> |
> You're dreaming of a utopia where computers just read our minds and > know what we're thinking. So what if I can pass 42 into an object. > What do I intend to happen with that 42? Do I want to add the element > to a list? Access the 42nd element? Delete the 42nd element? Let the > object pick a behavior at random? Huh?, No the programmer has to think of how data interacts with his/her objects. It's just that *now* the language is wise enough to teach them to think about it. > So > what's the benefit of that over having the object implement the > __call__ method? You bring up an interesting subject. I think you could get rid of the __call__ special method on objects. I think this is the wrong view into the object universe or *data ecosystem*. > Also, why would we re-use the bit shift operators for message passing? > Just because C++ decided to overload the existing operators to mean > reading into and writing out of a stream doesn't mean it's a good > idea. You're right, perhaps there's a better set of symbols that suggest "moving data". Mark
Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.python
csiph-web