Re: The Foundation of OO (XDb)

"James" <jraustin1_at_hotmail.com> wrote in message news:a6e74506.0206122137.6c6494ad_at_posting.google.com...
> > I think for you a review of basic OOP is in order...unless...you use
some
> > language I'm not familiar with where they use the terms the way you do
(??)
>
> I want to redefine OO, I think it should be as below:
>
> An object represents a thing: a value, a word, a person, a car, a
> sound, a picture, a movie, a smell, a feeling, an idea, the concept of
> a Marble, Marble1, Marble2, Marble3, etc.
> An object (Marble) can have instances (M1, M2, M3).
> An instance (M1) is an object that has a class (Marble).
> A class (Marble) is an object that has an instance (M1).

An object (Marble) can have objects (M1, M2, M3).
An object (M1) is an object that has an object (Marble).
An object (Marble) is an object that has an object (M1).

Oh, yeah. That's useful!!! Received on Thu Jun 13 2002 - 12:17:34 CEST