Re: A numerical methods viewpoint on OO/FP/Relational
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2001 17:07:48 +0100
Message-ID: <9j9ksh$ae0$1_at_newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>
"H. S. Lahman" <h.s.lahman_at_worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:3B48C910.439DCE08_at_worldnet.att.net...
> To see why this is nasty, look at a few typical OO applications' methods
> that call other methods to invoke other behaviors (other than simple
> attribute accesses). If all those method calls could be moved to the
> end of the calling method after all of its own processing is completed
> without breaking it, then the method is not context dependent. The
> calls would simply be announcements that the caller's processing was
> done.
>But if those behaviors can't be moved without breaking the
> method, the calling method's execution is dependent on external context,
> which breaks encapsulation.
What do you mean by "context" here, the state of the system or somthing else ?. I'm trying to reconcile this statement with my distributed object service user/service provider POV: a method needs somthing doing to continue (i.e. non-movable operation as you describe) so it asks the object broker for something that can satisfy its requirement and then makes the invocation. What dangerous dependency am I creating by doing this ?, does this make me a glorified fortran programmer :-/ ? .
Paul C. Received on Fri Jul 20 2001 - 18:07:48 CEST