home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: comp.object
- Path: sparky!uunet!mcsun!news.funet.fi!funic!nokia.fi!tele.nokia!girod
- From: girod@tele.nokia.fi (Marc Girod)
- Subject: Re: Can functions be objects?
- In-Reply-To: knight@mrco.carleton.ca's message of Mon, 27 Jul 1992 13:41:06 GMT
- Message-ID: <GIROD.92Jul30103716@node_262d6.tele.nokia.fi>
- Sender: usenet@noknic.nokia.fi (USENET at noknic)
- Nntp-Posting-Host: rat.ts.tele.nokia.fi
- Reply-To: girod@tele.nokia.fi
- Organization: kpd
- References: <2840@media03.UUCP> <knight.712244466@cunews>
- Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 08:37:16 GMT
- Lines: 29
-
- I may be coming in the middle of a discussion, not having read its
- beginning, but...
-
- I don't quite see the problem with functions being objects.
-
- I would first remind some wisdom by Rumbaugh & al about modelling:
-
- "... you must not search for absolute truth, but for adequacy for some
- purpose. There is no single "correct" model of a situation, only
- adequate and inadequate ones."
-
- Well, when is it adequate to consider function objects?
-
- I think that as soon as you do not want any more to model a function
- as a durationless operation, you are entitled to consider making it an
- object.
-
- To try to go more general, as soon as you want to handle parameters
- that do not relate with the function's abstract purpose, such as its
- host process/thread, in a multi process environment, or the processor
- it is running on, to allow it to be handled remotely in a multi
- processor environment, or its priority, etc...
- --
- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
- | Marc Girod - Nokia Telecommunications Phone: +358-0-511 7703 |
- | TL4E - P.O. Box 12 Fax: +358-0-511 7432 |
- | SF-02611 Espoo 61 - Finland Internet: girod@tele.nokia.fi |
- | X.400: C=FI, A=Elisa, P=Nokia Telecom, UNIT=TRS, SUR=Girod, GIV=Marc |
- +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
-