On Aug 8, 2:51 pm, lipska the kat <lipskathe...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote: > The point I'm obviously struggling to make is that words convey concepts > The word Person conveys a whole lifetime of experience of People and as > imperfect human beings many of us are unable to tease out 'bits of being > a person' that are relevant to the system we are developing. Inevitably > other seemingly irreversibly entwined bits keep popping up to cloud our > thinking. This is my experience, not an isolated case but one that has > popped up again and again.
I once sat for a presentation of a wannabe university teacher. The subject she chose was object-orientation. She spent some time on the usual dope about employee, manager etc. Finally she reached the base-class: Person. Or so we thought... Then suddenly she started 'extending' the bases: Person inherits from mammal inherits from vertebrate inherits from animal Now in principle one could perhaps find an app where this whole inheritance hierarchy makes sense. But I cannot think of one. (Maybe something from Orwell??) In any case this is the incident that makes me side with your "NO PERSON" dictum. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
