Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.compilers > #1376
| From | anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.compilers |
| Subject | Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) |
| Date | 2014-09-10 16:14 +0000 |
| Organization | Institut fuer Computersprachen, Technische Universitaet Wien |
| Message-ID | <14-09-010@comp.compilers> (permalink) |
| References | <14-09-005@comp.compilers> <14-09-007@comp.compilers> |
glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> writes:
>For that reason, I tended to think of imperative as exclusive
>from object-oriented.
One way to categorize programming languages is "imperative" ("do this!
do that!") vs. "declarative" ("x is the list of primes.").
"Object-oriented" is a property (or a collection of properties) of
some programming languages; the original object-oriented languages are
all imperative. Some concepts have been transferred from
object-oriented imperative languages to functional languages, but
whether these languages are considered object-oriented probably
depends on who you ask.
In any case, "imperative" and "object-oriented" are everything but
exclusive.
>Not that you can't, or shouldn't, write
>imperative programs in OO languages, but that it wouldn't be
>used as a term in the description. (Or, why is it that vol. 2
>isn't called "Non-Object Oriented Languages"?)
You would have to ask the editor. "Non-Object Oriented Languages"
would describe everything in Volume 2-4. My guess is that he did not
call Volume 2 "Non-Object Oriented Imperative Languages" because that
would be very long-winded, and since there is a separate volume on
object-oriented languages, it is clear that Volume 2 does not cover
that.
- anton
--
M. Anton Ertl
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at
http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/
Back to comp.compilers | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) Boris Burshteyn <bburshteyn@amsdec.com> - 2014-09-09 12:38 -0700
Re: Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu> - 2014-09-10 01:48 +0000
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) Kaz Kylheku <kaz@kylheku.com> - 2014-09-10 04:58 +0000
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2014-09-10 09:44 +0100
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-09-10 16:14 +0000
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) Martin Ward <martin@gkc.org.uk> - 2014-09-11 13:16 +0100
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2014-09-15 08:07 +0000
csiph-web