Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #33672
| From | Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.javascript |
| Subject | Re: Not understanding OOP stuff |
| Date | 2017-07-27 15:15 +0200 |
| Organization | PointedEars Software (PES) |
| Message-ID | <11827468.uLZWGnKmhe@PointedEars.de> (permalink) |
| References | (8 earlier) <87a83ur1kp.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <3335323.kQq0lBPeGt@PointedEars.de> <871sp5ph3z.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <10884077.O9o76ZdvQC@PointedEars.de> <87379km8vc.fsf@bsb.me.uk> |
Ben Bacarisse wrote:
> Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> writes:
>> Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>>> 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.
No, the assignment
o.foo = f;
could have been silently discarded or modified because of a previous
Object.defineProperty(Object.prototype, "foo", {
"set": function () {
// …
}
});
> I am sure that ECMAScript can something very like Smalltalk's message
> passing, but the example was not close enough in my opinion.
I do not know Smalltalk well enough to confirm or deny this.
--
PointedEars
FAQ: <http://PointedEars.de/faq> | <http://PointedEars.de/es-matrix>
<https://github.com/PointedEars> | <http://PointedEars.de/wsvn/>
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
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