I think the important take away is that Julia's *multiple* dispatch can be much more powerful than traditional "object oriented" single dispatch. Once you get your head wrapped around that, I don't think you really would want to go back to the Python/Java/JS/C++ single dispatch way of doing things.
On Wednesday, October 7, 2015 at 1:26:00 PM UTC-4, cheng wang wrote: > > > > On Wednesday, October 7, 2015 at 6:47:40 PM UTC+2, Steven G. Johnson wrote: >> >> It's a bad idea. You shouldn't try to write C programs that look like >> Fortran programs, you shouldn't speak French with English pronunciation, >> and you shouldn't try to write Julia programs that look like Python >> programs. Part of programming is learning to adapt to the local style, >> both the style of a programming language and also the style of a project >> that you are contributing to. >> > I don't see why it is bad to support more styles if there is no harm to > the original one. > So actually I was also asking if this new style will bring evil things to > local style. > > >> >> The only difference between object.verb(args...) and verb(object, >> args...) is spelling. Since there is no practical need for the former, you >> should just get used to the Julia spelling when writing Julia code. >> > > Since dot already means access fields of an object. It slightly affects, > maybe? > > >> >> Steven >> >> PS. In olden times, many people learned programming in Pascal. When they >> switched to C, their first instinct was often to define macros that made C >> look more like Pascal, and this was universally considered to be a mistake >> by experienced programmers. See: http://c-faq.com/cpp/slm.html >> <http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fc-faq.com%2Fcpp%2Fslm.html&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNEIWoEYTeSTZp4bHDfu-0RH_mDeJw> >> > Thanks for sharing this story, it is interesting. > However I always like to reason about thing in details, not just you > should don't do this. > > > >
