From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.1 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_20,INVALID_MSGID, REPLYTO_WITHOUT_TO_CC autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 109fba,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid109fba,public X-Google-Thread: fac41,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidfac41,public X-Google-Thread: f43e6,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gidf43e6,public X-Google-Thread: 11cae8,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid11cae8,public X-Google-Thread: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public From: Bill Gooch Subject: Re: What is wrong with OO ? Date: 1996/12/16 Message-ID: <32B56DEC.32E1@iconcomp.com>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 204391619 references: <58se4d$68c@news3.digex.net> <32B3DD77.2F17@deep.net> x-rtcode: d500a6693200a7ebc3b56c24 content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii organization: Icon Computing mime-version: 1.0 reply-to: bill@iconcomp.com newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.lnag.java,comp.object,comp.software-eng x-mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (WinNT; I) Date: 1996-12-16T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Tansel Ersavas wrote: > > In fact, as soon as you start to think, you start working on abstracted > realm. It is the basis of our thinking, our understanding. We can not > grasp things as they are, because anything has almost infinite > complexity. Complete agreement, except for the "almost" part. > If you want to model a chair, to model it as is in the real > world, ..then you'd have to model it *physically*, e.g. by building another chair (maybe a miniature one). Software modeling by nature is based entirely on abstract mental models. > you have to model it down to the molecules, even quarks. All of > our thinking involves abstraction.... You said it. Molecules and quarks are abstract models of what we think we know about "the real world." Physical reality itself is something else again. Nick Leaton wrote: > > Abstraction or generalisation is involved, but when modeling you can > distort reality, or delete realilty. In your case of the chair you may > choose to delete atomic structure as outside your model boundary. You > might choose to model they material(s) used in making the chair, wood, > steel plastic and ignore the type of wood. Distortion would be where you > modeled benches and chairs as a single class and ignored the restriction > on number of people that can sit on one instance at any time. I would argue that in these terms, both distortion and deletion are inherent in all software modeling. The only problem is that sometimes people seem to ignore or gloss over the fact that these phenomena are unavoidable. -- William D. Gooch bill@iconcomp.com Icon Computing http://www.iconcomp.com Texas liaison for the International Programmers Guild For IPG info, see http://www.ipgnet.com/ipghome.htm