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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID 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: 103376,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public X-Google-Thread: 1108a1,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid1108a1,public X-Google-Thread: 114809,b87849933931bc93 X-Google-Attributes: gid114809,public From: Mike Klein Subject: Re: OO, C++, and something much better! Date: 1997/02/26 Message-ID: <3314F773.33C3@alumni.caltech.edu>#1/1 X-Deja-AN: 221716431 References: <5de62l$f13$1@goanna.cs.rmit.edu.au> Organization: Codehenge Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++,comp.lang.smalltalk,comp.lang.eiffel,comp.lang.ada,comp.object Date: 1997-02-26T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Everybody knows that w.r.t. computers, operators are the guys who load your card deck, and bring you your printout when the job is done. Isn't it yet evident in this thread that a launguage independant definition of operator will probably have to be *very* ambiguously defined. For example, C has functions, not procedures. Smalltalk has methods, not functions, not procedures. Scheme has procedures, although just about any Lisp programmers would call them functions with nary a raised eyebrow. Basic has subroutines. In language independent terms, these are all various examples of subprograms. But using the term subprogram denies all interesting nuances. Mike Klein -- mailto:mklein@alumni.caltech.edu http://www.alumni.caltech.edu/~mklein