Comment by bunderbunder
1 year ago
Message passing belongs up there with lisp, forth and pure functional programming as paradigms that are worth learning for "the profound enlightenment experience you will have when you finally get it." But I often see that my peers in the profession lack the kind of growth mentality that enables a person to see past the alienness of less algol-y languages.
Quote from "How To Become a Hacker" by Eric S. Raymond: http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html
see my comment above: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42132104 i can't tell the difference and therefore i don't see what profound enlightenment experience i am supposed to have.
fwiw
'what matters about an object is its protocol: the set of messages that it understands, and the way that it behaves in response to those messages. Nowadays, this is sometimes also referred to as the objectʼs interface. The key idea is that when we use an object, we focus on how it appears from the outside, and “abstract away from” its internal structure: more simply, that the internal structure of an object is hidden from all other objects. Thatʼs why I said “the set of messages that it understands,” and not “the set of methods that it implements.” In many languages they are the same, but I wanted to emphasise the external rather than the internal view.'
"Object-oriented programming: Some history, and challenges for the next fifty years" Andrew P. Black
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ic.2013.08.002
So, a matter of emphasis?
If you can't tell the difference, you didn't actually learn it.
Doesn't mean you have to like it, but they are different.
you may want to read the whole discussion following the linked comment to understand what i learned. if you have any additional insights i'd appreciate your input.
8 replies →