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

Groups > comp.lang.javascript > #33628

Re: Not understanding OOP stuff

From Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>
Newsgroups comp.lang.javascript
Subject Re: Not understanding OOP stuff
Date 2017-07-23 22:03 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <87379msw5i.fsf@bsb.me.uk> (permalink)
References (1 earlier) <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>

Show all headers | View raw

Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> writes:

> On Sunday, July 23, 2017 at 9:10:58 PM UTC+2, Ben Bacarisse wrote:
>> Julio Di Egidio <julio@diegidio.name> writes:
>> > On Sunday, July 23, 2017 at 6:12:22 PM UTC+2, Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn wrote:
>> >> Stefan Ram wrote:
>> > <snip>
>> >> >   (At least, this is the common metaphor.)
>> >> 
>> >> Programming is _not_ philosophy.
>> >
>> > Agreed: and, crucially, JavaScript is _not_ an object-oriented
>> > language.
>> 
>> From ECMA 262:
>> 
>>   "ECMAScript is an object-oriented programming language..."
>> 
>> Maybe one could call the point "debatable"?  (Not that I want to debate
>> it.)
>
> It may be debatable, it certainly is debated, but I think it's total
> nonsense and essentially a consequence of the so called "OO uber alles".
> Also, you have already been warned that the JS standard does have few
> problems: supporting confusion on the very paradigm is one of them.

The interesting things are the concepts not the names.  ECMAScript
supports many of the concepts that people like Alan Kay would say are
essential to being object-oriented.  It supports local retention and
hiding of state along with extreme late binding, but it does not use
message passing as the communication between objects.  (And the hiding
of state is not enforced.)

> JavaScript is a *functional* language, just with specific support for
> "objects" and prototypal inheritance: some call it "object-based" instead
> of "object-oriented" in order to name that distinction.

Taking a cue from you, I'd rather say that it supports functional
programming.  A language that has mutable state, and in which that state
is so often used in idiomatic code, has a rather weak claim to be called
a functional language.

> In fact, that one can build a fully OO abstraction on top of JS means that
> the language is super-powerful, not that anyone should really go for any
> such aberrations.

Right, but that's always going end up in a logical hole.  What matters
is what is directly supported by the language and what typical code
really does.  For example, F# and SML both have mutable "variables", but
they are so rarely used in idiomatic code that this does not usually
prevent them from being called "functional".

<snip>
-- 
Ben.

Back to comp.lang.javascript | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

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