Re: The wisdom of the object mentors (Was: Searching OO Associations with RDBMS Persistence Models)
Date: 31 May 2006 23:36:38 -0700
Message-ID: <1149143798.414053.91490_at_g10g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>
Bruno Desthuilliers wrote:
> frebe73_at_gmail.com a écrit :
>
> I'm afraid your confusing OO (ie: *object* oriented) with
> "class-oriented" (like in Java). In a "true OO language", *everything*
> is an object. So functions are objects too. So functions are first-order.
Java is object oriented by any reasonable definition of the term.
Your claim about "*everything* is an object" and therefore in an OOPL, functions must be objects, is not valid. It is not the case that *everything* in an OOPL is an object. Is a comment an object? Is private or public an object? Is a field an object? No.
OOPLs have methods. There is no requirement to have functions be objects to qualify an as OOPL.
Marshall Received on Thu Jun 01 2006 - 08:36:38 CEST