ps too subtle a point that isn't worth trying
> to capturing. Anyway, my analogy isn't exact since my "book" is really just
> a reference to the
> title page. :)
>
>
>> Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 22:44:50 -0700
>> Subject: Re: [Boston.pm] object composition (
This works in Ruby:
class Integer
def hello ()
puts self
end
end
5.hello() # outputs 5
For performance reasons there is a slight bit of cheating for some
numerical types. For example you cannot add a method to the number 5
only. See http://ruby-doc.org/core-2.1.4/Fixnum.htm
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Ben Tilly wrote:
>> Do smalltalkers accept Ruby's claims? Their native OO is more OO than
>> P5's (but we have choices), but is arithmetic really done with messages?
>
> Yes. Ruby's OO model is an exact copy of Smalltalk's. Arithmetic
> works the same way once yo
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 1:00 PM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Adam Russell wrote:
>>
>> I've been doing OO for years with pure-OO type environments such as Ruby
>
> Do smalltalkers accept Ruby's claims? Their native OO is more OO than
> P5's (but we have choices), but is a
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 5:13 PM, Ben Tilly wrote:
> So my experience is, "Arrays are a better answer than linked lists in
> Perl except when Perl is a bad choice of language."
I can agree with that.
Especially since i said for pure-OO exploration, Perl5 native OO was a
poor choice, and the right l
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 8:02 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Greg London wrote:
>
>> My experience has been that having a page instance be mangled
>> in some way to behave like a book is almost always going to be
>> a regrettable coding decision.
>>
>
> Nice analogy. Agre
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 3:29 PM, Adam Russell wrote:
>
> I've been doing OO for years with pure-OO type environments such as Ruby
Do smalltalkers accept Ruby's claims? Their native OO is more OO than
P5's (but we have choices), but is arithmetic really done with messages?
> but now that I have
experiment with SmallTalk if I had the time but for now, when I have a
spare couple of hours on a Saturday night I need something with less syntactic
ramp up time.
From: bill.n1...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 15:04:16 -0500
Subject: Re: [Boston.pm] object composition (has-a) with built-in OO
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 12:11 PM, Adam Russell wrote:
> I approached this purely from an OO design perspective without regard to
> the language much less the implementation.
I *do* recommend learning true OO style in a pure-OO environment
(somewhere were 1 and 0 are objects responding to metho
implementation.
From: bill.n1...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 11:51:47 -0500
Subject: Re: [Boston.pm] object composition (has-a) with built-in OO system
To: ac.russ...@live.com
CC: boston-pm@mail.pm.org
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Adam Russell wrote:
Ah, ok, thanks for spelling that out!In my code
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:39 AM, Adam Russell wrote:
> Ah, ok, thanks for spelling that out!
> In my code I used a scalar reference so I seem to have stumbled onto that
> without really appreciating it.
>
In strongly typed OO, particularly where the only automatic GC is
stack-based, embedded h
Ah, ok, thanks for spelling that out!
In my code I used a scalar reference so I seem to have stumbled onto that
without really appreciating it.
This is the answer I seek. :)
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 2, 2014, at 11:30 AM, Bill Ricker wrote:
>
>
>> On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Adam Rus
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 11:08 AM, Adam Russell wrote:
> My question arose because it seems that Perl's built in OO system allows
> you to do "has-a" but only asa slight twist on "is-a". Or may be not. Has
> there been an answer to that yet? If so, I didn't see it.
I touched on this. Since Perl
n1...@gmail.com
Date: Sun, 2 Nov 2014 11:02:08 -0500
Subject: Re: [Boston.pm] object composition (has-a) with built-in OO system
To: em...@greglondon.com
CC: ac.russ...@live.com; boston-pm@mail.pm.org
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Greg London wrote:
My experience has been that having a pa
iki/Has-a
I was thinking along the lines of the example there of a car that "has-a"
chassis when making my LinkedList that "has-a" head node.
I'm not making an bold claims that this is the best way to do it, again, this
was just my experimenting with some code late at nigh
On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 10:14 AM, Greg London wrote:
> My experience has been that having a page instance be mangled
> in some way to behave like a book is almost always going to be
> a regrettable coding decision.
>
Nice analogy. Agreed.
As to Ben's comments on Linked lists vs Perl arrays, li
My experience has been that having a page instance be mangled
in some way to behave like a book is almost always going to be
a regrettable coding decision.
What I sometimes do would be to have the page contain a pointer
to the book in which it is bound, so that the page can call
book level methods
nt that isn't worth
trying to capturing. Anyway, my analogy isn't exact since my "book" is really
just a reference to the title page. :)
> Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2014 22:44:50 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Boston.pm] object composition (has-a) with built-in OO system
> From: b
Just so that you know, it is very hard to find a use case for linked
lists in Perl where a native array is not a better option. That said,
why draw a distinction between a node in a linked list and a linked
list? I would just have one class, that is a reference to a node.
(That itself might have
I was experimenting with some code, jogging my memory of linked lists.
The approach I took was to define a package LinkedListNode and then a
package LinkedList.
My idea is that my LinkedList package is a wrapper around the head node
which would also define
some useful methods such as print_list()
20 matches
Mail list logo
