Re: Prototype-Based Programming
- Posted by jimcbrown (admin) Sep 25, 2013
- 2259 views
"You should be able to define new types, but you shouldn't have to express every program as the definition of new types."
Well I like, symmetrical matrices i.e. matrices with same shape throughout (2 and 3 dimensions filled fully); I can define them once and use the same code to define in all my programs.
In short, oop is not useful at all.
What?
Matt
Actually, though it's possible I'm misunderstanding or something, this appears to make sense to me.
Basically, using the example of custom matrices, OP points out that OP can make new types without having to resort to OOP to do it. In other words, OOP is not necessary even if you want to be able to define new types - so that's one OOP-only use case that can be crossed off the list. Or something like that, anyways.
