Re: [Meta,OT] OOP and Forks
Re: [Meta,OT] OOP and Forks
- Subject: Re: [Meta,OT] OOP and Forks
- From: Arthur J Knapp <email@hidden>
- Date: Fri, 01 Feb 2002 15:09:53 -0500
>
From: email@hidden
>
Date: Fri, 1 Feb 2002 01:57:59 EST
>
Subject: [Meta,OT] OOP and Forks
>
I'm a bit puzzled philosophically. Maybe someone can shed some light.
>
>
When the Mac was created, Apple decided that files of all types should have
>
resource forks and data (including programming code) forks. This basically
>
kept the nouns and verbs separated, and allowed fascinating things like
>
ResEdit to exist. IMHO, it was brilliant.
It was brilliant, however, your analogy isn't working for me.
In what way can the resource or the data fork of a file be
considered a "verb"?
Please understand that I am not being "picky". I tried very hard
comprehend this analogy, and I failed to do so.
>
OOP, as I grok it, involves "objects" which internally contain their own
>
nouns and verbs and you don't need to know anything about them, just enter
>
thru the front door and pay your money please.
Right, and just to be clear:
script HelloWorld
property Hello : "world" -- property, noun
on World() -- handler, method, verb
return my Hello
end World
>
These seem like two very different ways to structure things.
Let me try an analogy:
If we consider an application file to be an "object", and we
think of the resource fork as where modifiable data is keep, and
we consider the data fork as representing "verbs", (executable
code), then we are looking at exactly the SAME way to structure
things:
script File
property resource_fork : noun
on data_fork() --> verb
When we move or copy a file around on the Desktop, it is like copying
or moving an object around in code: the "nouns" and "verbs" travel with
each other.
>
For me, I very much like the idea that nouns and verbs (data and code) are
>
separate. The only nouns I let my objects have are throw-away temp variables
>
and data structures built dynamically from a common source. That way,
>
multiple different handlers can each work with the same data.
Why can't multiple handlers work with the properties of one script
object?
>
Am I missing something? Is this a meaningful paradox/dichotomy that I am
>
seeing? Can both philosophies coexist in a Mac/Unix world?
Again, I don't fully understand. By mentioning Unix, I assume you
are continuing the resource/data fork analogy. Consider that most
of the purposes behind resource forks are simply taken up by
preference files in most other computer systems, ie: The preference
file contains the "nouns".
I need a better understanding of where you are going with this.
{ Arthur J. Knapp, of <
http://www.STELLARViSIONs.com>
<
mailto:email@hidden>
try
<
http://www.VivaLaData.com/>
on error number -128
end try
}