Re: Not understanding OOP stuff

Path	csiph.com!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.javascript
Subject	Re: Not understanding OOP stuff
Date	Tue, 25 Jul 2017 23:47:51 +0100
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Lines	49
Message-ID	<87379km8vc.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink)
References	<dc1ffbaa-0933-47cd-b0dd-969f7927ed03@googlegroups.com> <objects-20170721181824@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <1914438.irdbgypaU6@PointedEars.de> <02ec6752-8a2d-4116-9396-71d36dcbd579@googlegroups.com> <87k22zrmtj.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <3298850e-dce6-4384-af58-8bb58830960f@googlegroups.com> <87379msw5i.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <messages-20170723230918@ram.dialup.fu-berlin.de> <87a83ur1kp.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <3335323.kQq0lBPeGt@PointedEars.de> <871sp5ph3z.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <10884077.O9o76ZdvQC@PointedEars.de>
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding	8bit
Injection-Info	mx02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="05d2412e23e6c598c86f644d6317b92b"; logging-data="5990"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18GfI4cFpLYRLwA8FonjpF5ba01uWCo6ZM="
Cancel-Lock	sha1:yYvFLx0wnK1Yks/1Vqe4WgOs3To= sha1:7AflzEgVaW1RHsY4P6px1M2HkfE=
X-BSB-Auth	1.e414be9b99f93def09a5.20170725234751BST.87379km8vc.fsf@bsb.me.uk
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.javascript:33668

Show key headers only | View raw

Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> writes:

> Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>
>> […] That's all part of the late binding that some people consider so 
>> important.
>> 
>> […] in a message passing language the message can fail if the
>> object does not implement that particular message.  In your examples,
>> the message sending (which is just a function call) can't fail for that
>> reason.
>> 
>> To my mind, message passing would look rather more like:
>> 
>>   var msg = ["foo", 42, 23];
>>   o.process_message(msg);
>> 
>> This would succeed or fail depending on whether o's prototype chain
>> included a foo method at that time.
>
> Calling a method on an object referred to by “o” – which in OOP/UML terms is 
> equivalent to sending a message to an object where the call’s arguments are 
> the message contents – *does* fail if that object does not have, and no 
> object in its prototype chain has, a method of that name *at runtime*.  
> *That* *is* late binding.

Yes, I know.  Your example could not fail because it gave the object the
target method.  I am sure that ECMAScript can something very like
Smalltalk's message passing, but the example was not close enough in my
opinion.

>   try
>   {
>     o.foo(42, 23);
>   }
>   catch (e)
>   {
>     /* TypeError: o.foo is not a function */
>   }
>
> ISTM you are confusing messages sent to objects with those appended to a 
> message queue (which does not need to pertain to objects).  Maybe because 
> you are accustomed to programming languages or software systems where 
> object-orientation is implemented in that way.

No.

-- 
Ben.

Thread

Not understanding OOP stuff bit-naughty@hotmail.com - 2017-07-21 09:11 -0700
  Re: Not understanding OOP stuff JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2017-07-22 19:36 +0700
  Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-23 18:12 +0200
    Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-23 09:19 -0700
      Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-07-23 20:10 +0100
        Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-23 12:42 -0700
          Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-07-23 22:03 +0100
            Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-23 14:18 -0700
              Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-07-24 03:22 +0100
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-23 21:44 -0700
            Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-07-24 03:49 +0100
              Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-23 21:50 -0700
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2017-07-24 19:50 +0100
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-24 12:00 -0700
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2017-07-25 09:29 +0100
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-25 05:58 -0700
              Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-24 11:04 +0200
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-07-25 00:09 +0100
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2017-07-25 09:20 +0100
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-07-25 11:31 +0100
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-25 17:02 +0200
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> - 2017-07-25 23:47 +0100
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-27 15:15 +0200
            Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-24 10:33 +0200
              Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-24 02:13 -0700
          Re: Not understanding OOP stuff John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2017-07-24 11:15 +0100
            Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-24 03:58 -0700
              Re: Not understanding OOP stuff John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2017-07-25 09:42 +0100
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-25 05:59 -0700
                Re: Not understanding OOP stuff John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2017-07-25 18:32 +0100
        Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-23 22:42 +0200
          Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-23 13:55 -0700
          Re: Not understanding OOP stuff John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2017-07-24 11:18 +0100
            Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-24 15:19 +0200
      Re: Not understanding OOP stuff "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2017-07-24 10:20 -0700
        Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> - 2017-07-24 11:46 -0700
          Re: Not understanding OOP stuff "Michael Haufe (TNO)" <tno@thenewobjective.com> - 2017-07-25 05:37 -0700
    Re: Not understanding OOP stuff John G Harris <niam@jghnorth.org.uk.invalid> - 2017-07-24 11:04 +0100
      Re: Not understanding OOP stuff Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> - 2017-07-24 16:04 +0200

csiph-web