Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.python > #12706

Re: Functions vs OOP

Show all headers | View raw

On 03/09/2011 17:15, William Gill 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.
>
> It seems to me that they are complimentary.

I think you mean "complementary". :-)

> It makes sense to create objects and have some functions that take
> those objects as arguments. Are they suggesting that any function
> that takes an object as an argument should always be a method of that
> object? Conversely I can see creating functions that take raw input
> (e.g. strings) and return it in a format compatible with an object's
> constructor, rather than have objects accept any conceivable format
> for its constructor.
>
> Am I missing something, or am I taking things too literally?

I think that it's all about "state".

In functional programming, there's no state; a function's result
depends solely on its arguments, so it will always return the same
result for the same given arguments.

In OOP, on the other hand, an object often has a state; a method may
return a different result each time it's called, even for the same
given arguments.

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