Re: Objects and Relations

On Feb 22, 1:35 pm, "Alfredo Novoa" <alfred..._at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Feb 21, 4:09 pm, Bob Badour <bbad..._at_pei.sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> > >>I prefer to only use "object" to mean instance. Why would one say
> > >>object when one means class? ie given that we have different words
> > >>for these different concepts, let's use them!
>
> > If "object" means object instances exclusively, then the term is
> > synonymous with "variable".
>
> "Object instance" might mean value. "Object" is synonymous with
> "instance" so "object instance" is redundant.
I agree object is a vague term. But I used it to help DavidBL and OO thinkers make sense of RM (trying to relate what they know to RM). I prefer to use the term *class* in comparing OO terms to RM terms. In such sense, a class is not the same as a class instantiation. (I have to admit I am not very familiar with all OO subtleties)

> >Why would one say "object" when one means
> > "variable" ?

> Because it is a sloppy term for sloppy thinkers.
Maybe, but insulting the thinkers won't encourage them to use a better terminology (namely RM terminology). Received on Thu Feb 22 2007 - 15:17:43 CET