Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Tuesday 18 December 2001 09:48 am, Jonathan Borden wrote:
> Regarding objects vs. data (which is where we started), the prime
> distinction is between opacity and translucency. When objects are well
> described, and their state can be described by the getter setter properties
> in their interfaces, as data objects they can be translucent. Object
> _methods_ however are generally opaque -- the implementation hides behind
> an interface.
I actually think this is a weakness in many languages. Java had reflection
added to address some of the issues here.
> Contrast LISP and XSLT, whose method implementations can be
> fired across the wire (in a perfect world) for remote execution.
I would argue that this is precisely the most powerful kind of remote
> XML might be more generally represented using something akin to an
> s-expression notation by introducing delimeters for an unordered set '['
> and ']' and then we can represent:
> <foo aaa="111" bbb="222" ccc="333">
> <bar ddd="444"/>
> <bop eee="555">
If you have a look at XEXPR, this blurs the distinction between attributes
and elements for passing in parameters. It's somewhat LISPish (and did the
scheme guys flame me! ;-))