OpenEuphoria

Re: Eu improvements (part 4)

• Posted by Karl Bochert <kbochert at copper.net> Jan 05, 2007
• 693 views

c.k.lester wrote:
> 
> I messed up the paradigm... here it is corrected:
> 
> c.k.lester wrote:
> >
<snip earlier messages> 
> 
> newInstance("automobile_database","myCars")
> 
> so 'myCars' is now a database of automobiles.
> 

> 
> this really should be
> 
> auto = newInstance("automobile")
> 
> or better
> 
> newInstance("automobile","auto1")
> 
> which creates a new automobile called auto1.
> 
> With this paradigm, we have no global constants required.
> 
> 
> -- modify a property
> property("auto1","maker","Ford")
> 
> 
> -- add the auto to the database
> addObject("myCars","auto1")
> 
This 'OOP as a mindset for using functions' may work for some, but I find
it very difficult to read or understand.

My posts were about 2 features that might make me a Euphorian again:
  .  Pass By Reference
  .  Structured Sequences
not about OOP or ways to implement it.

It happens that these features would allow OOP proponents to create
much improved OOP libraries, with which they could write advanced
OOP programs which would mystify me.
That's OK - after all I already find many Euphoria programmers
complex use of sequences terrifying.
The goal of these features is to allow a programmer to write programs
that more easily read and understood. Period.

With that in mind, I would ask those who disagree which category
they place themselves in:
1) Good ideas, but flawed implementation
2) I don't like PBR
3) I don't like SS
4) Both are instruments of the devil
5) Irrelevant  -- Euphoria is perfect

Ktb