Re: Operationalize orthogonality
Date: Mon, 5 Jun 2006 15:51:19 +0300
"x" <x_at_not-exists.org> wrote in message news:e618mn$5d7$1_at_nntp.aioe.org...
> "Bob Badour" <bbadour_at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
> > Tony D wrote:
> > > In this context, I equate the terms domain and type - as mentioned in
> > > the presentation pointed to elsewhere on this thread. (I don't,
> > > however, equate classes with domains or types - principally because
> > > I'm not 100% clear on what a class is exactly, and (b) from what I do
> > > understand about classes & objects, there is a dynamic element to them
> > > that I wouldn't expect to find in a domain or type. I am open to
> > > persuasion on these points.)
> > a) Neither are the OO proponents.
> > b) That comes from the frequent use of 'object' as synonymous with
> > 'variable'. However, 'object' gets used for a lot of different things
And proponents are the ones who define proscriptions. :-) Received on Mon Jun 05 2006 - 14:51:19 CEST