Re: [Python-ideas] Message passing syntax for objects

References	(1 earlier) <CAN-Kwu0FHJcG-fPy6TsXtgJ2+0EgtMOad88kgU=iqA+oNfyVsw@mail.gmail.com> <5146A76D.1020205@canterbury.ac.nz> <CAMjeLr8ip4bbA-KCfvzeOCb2mk=_3B1eB1FF-tsc4Xz9rgWboQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMjeLr9umOKdaKjDOx0b-p5aonYc8xj79NH8wEwD3tfAD-B-qQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAMuTYXiPDtK2Z+bqk3+xkV_5j51czb4t=Ndb1Yx_P9g6F-+Lwg@mail.gmail.com>
Date	2013-03-18 11:29 -0700
Subject	Re: [Python-ideas] Message passing syntax for objects
From	Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.python
Message-ID	<mailman.3465.1363631342.2939.python-list@python.org> (permalink)

Show all headers | View raw

> 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 comp.lang.python | Previous | Next | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Re: [Python-ideas] Message passing syntax for objects Mark Janssen <dreamingforward@gmail.com> - 2013-03-18 11:29 -0700

csiph-web