Re: [WebDNA] [OT] WebDNA Wiki - need grammar check / suggestions
This WebDNA talk-list message is from 2009
It keeps the original formatting.
numero = 103949
interpreted = N
texte = Grant Hulbert wrote: > Sorry, but WebDNA cannot be considered an object-oriented language. > Flexible; friendly; easy-to-use, yes: but not object-oriented. The > article will lose credibility if that stays in there. > > On Nov 4, 2009, at 1:44 PM, Donovan Brooke wrote: > >> Though we don't have terms such as "class", "Object", "Method", etc.. >> I think it can be argued that similar general concepts of those items >> can be created with WebDNA using the tool set we have. Include, >> Function, Object, Shell/Dos, Variable scoping etc.. all lend >> themselves to this idea. I don't have a traditional computer science >> background Grant, Christer, thanks for the feedback but it would help if you guys gave reasoning (in regards to the wikipedia article I posted). From my perspective, the description appears to be more inclusive than in the scope of only strict compiled (memory allocating) languages. "Particularly, read the "OOP in scripting" segment of the "Object-oriented programming" article on wikipedia." And from the wikipedia article: "Object (computer science)": " In computer science, an object, in the domain of object-oriented programming, usually means a compilation of attributes (object elements) and behaviors (methods) encapsulating an entity." "Methods" is another name for functions in my understanding, and with scoping and the function context, it is difficult for me to discern the differences in this and much of the code that I create. I'm easy to make a change once I understand, but I need more than just "WebDNA is not Object-oriented"... even from Mr. Hulbert. ;-) The live (hopefully) article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebDNA Thanks, Donovan -- Donovan Brooke WebDNA Software Corporation http://www.webdna.us **[Square Bracket Utopia]**
Associated Messages, from the most recent to the oldest:
Grant Hulbert wrote: > Sorry, but WebDNA cannot be considered an object-oriented language. > Flexible; friendly; easy-to-use, yes: but not object-oriented. The > article will lose credibility if that stays in there. > > On Nov 4, 2009, at 1:44 PM, Donovan Brooke wrote: > >> Though we don't have terms such as "class", "Object", "Method", etc.. >> I think it can be argued that similar general concepts of those items >> can be created with WebDNA using the tool set we have. Include, >> Function, Object, Shell/Dos, Variable scoping etc.. all lend >> themselves to this idea. I don't have a traditional computer science >> background Grant, Christer, thanks for the feedback but it would help if you guys gave reasoning (in regards to the wikipedia article I posted). From my perspective, the description appears to be more inclusive than in the scope of only strict compiled (memory allocating) languages. "Particularly, read the "OOP in scripting" segment of the "Object-oriented programming" article on wikipedia." And from the wikipedia article: "Object (computer science)": " In computer science, an object, in the domain of object-oriented programming, usually means a compilation of attributes (object elements) and behaviors (methods) encapsulating an entity." "Methods" is another name for functions in my understanding, and with scoping and the function context, it is difficult for me to discern the differences in this and much of the code that I create. I'm easy to make a change once I understand, but I need more than just "WebDNA is not Object-oriented"... even from Mr. Hulbert. ;-) The live (hopefully) article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WebDNA Thanks, Donovan -- Donovan Brooke WebDNA Software Corporation http://www.webdna.us **[Square Bracket Utopia]**
Donovan Brooke
DOWNLOAD WEBDNA NOW!
Top Articles:
Talk List
The WebDNA community talk-list is the best place to get some help: several hundred extremely proficient programmers with an excellent knowledge of WebDNA and an excellent spirit will deliver all the tips and tricks you can imagine...
Related Readings:
WebCat2.0 [format thousands .0f] no go (1997)
HELP!! problems with e-mail from WebCAT (1998)
Pre-flight public flag (1997)
Resetting a Formvariable (2000)
[OT] (waaaay OT) (2004)
searchable list archive (1997)
[random] only for 1-100??? (1997)
[WebDNA] Client wants backup copy of site (2010)
emailer on Windows Beta 18 (1997)
WebCat cannot handle compatible search parameters? (1997)
headers (2004)
Date to days (2002)
Showif for mulitple variations (1997)
Online magazine- monthly updates and such (1999)
WebCat & Backoffice Solution? (2000)
Welcome Back (was) Newbie Question (1999)
Incompatibility with WebCat 3 templates ... (2000)
Pay by Mail (CC, Check, Money Order) (2001)
NT [delete] (1998)
suffix mapping for NT? (1997)