Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #22907
| Message-ID | <1715169.MZ9Nrhk0Q3@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Date | 2014-01-31 14:08 +0100 |
| Subject | Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? |
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| References | (7 earlier) <ab53ee9e-5ef5-4943-bfc5-ebc05407dc19@googlegroups.com> <4006284.34SQex3vo1@PointedEars.de> <52e7fbdd$0$9504$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net> <2689391.ZCeiWr7303@PointedEars.de> <3256f79b-5a97-48d2-9022-429e60c3abd3@googlegroups.com> |
Michael Haufe (TNO) wrote:
> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> Christoph Michael Becker wrote:
>> > I believe at least one of the arguments Michael has made, is that the
>> > DOM defines interfaces, but not actual objects ("classes"), which can
>> > be
>> > extended. While a particular DOM implementation might expose an
>> > Element
>> > object, for instance, this is not mandatory. For that reason alone it
>> > is not possible to reliably extend DOM objects (let alone the problem
>> > that they are host objects, and ECMAScript leaves broad room for the
>> > actual behavior of these), what may be regarded as (impedance)
>> > mismatch.
>>
>> That would be a specious argument, then. The very purpose, and the
>> benefit, of an interface in OOP is that an object implementing it
>> provides a well- defined minimum set of properties and methods, [...]
>
> ..and yet it is not only a minimum is it? The implementations must be
> treated as maximums as well, which contrary to the idioms of the language.
How did you get those ideas?
>> [...] whereas how the methods are implemented is left to the object,
>> allowing for, but not requiring, polymorphism.
>
> There are at least five types of polymorphism, I assume you're referring
> to Ad-Hoc
I am aware only of three that are relevant here:
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polymorphism_(computer_science)>
Apparently I was referring to “Ad-hoc polymorphism” and “subtyping”.
>> So any mismatch between the DOMs and ECMAScript implementations, from
>> which they are derived, exists only in the mind of the person arguing
>> that an interface should allow the very thing that defeats its purpose.
>
> All I can do is sigh at this... You misunderstand I.M. as well as attacked
> a strawman here
What is this “I.M.” you are talking about?
--
PointedEars
Twitter: @PointedEars2
Please do not Cc: me. / Bitte keine Kopien per E-Mail.
Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-26 02:37 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-26 11:52 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-26 12:04 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-26 22:24 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-26 14:49 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-27 02:14 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-27 18:30 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-28 19:08 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-28 19:50 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-28 21:18 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-28 22:27 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-28 23:23 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-29 17:12 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-31 22:30 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-02-01 22:35 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-28 19:59 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-31 14:08 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-02-01 22:52 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-02-02 10:09 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-02-04 23:42 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-28 19:40 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-29 17:17 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-29 16:51 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-01-31 01:06 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-28 19:36 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2014-01-31 14:47 +0100
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-01-27 14:36 +0000
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-27 16:05 -0800
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-01-29 15:26 +0000
Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-29 16:44 -0800
"impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-30 11:10 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-01-30 10:38 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-30 13:30 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-01-30 12:45 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-30 14:05 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2014-01-31 21:32 +0000
OT: "impedance mismatch" (was: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed?) Christoph Michael Becker <cmbecker69@arcor.de> - 2014-02-01 01:15 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-02-01 02:40 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-01 10:02 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-01 09:54 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-01-30 11:06 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-30 14:02 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "ViLco" <villiber@tin.it> - 2014-01-30 16:24 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Denis McMahon <denismfmcmahon@gmail.com> - 2014-01-31 00:35 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-31 11:16 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-30 15:14 -0800
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-31 00:56 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2014-01-30 22:13 -0800
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-01-31 11:51 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <J.R.Stockton@physics.org> - 2014-01-31 19:58 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-01 09:30 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-02 17:44 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-03 01:15 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-03 14:58 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-02-03 15:36 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-03 17:59 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2014-02-03 17:18 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-03 19:47 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? John Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-04 10:33 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-06 13:40 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-06 10:12 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-07 10:32 +0100
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? Dr J R Stockton <reply1400@merlyn.demon.co.uk.invalid> - 2014-02-08 23:06 +0000
Re: "impedance mismatch", was: Re: JavaScript unfairly blamed? "Evertjan." <exxjxw.hannivoort@inter.nl.net> - 2014-02-09 10:33 +0100
csiph-web