Re: The world is not object oriented

I do not find anything to grasp in your spreadsheet paragraph quoted below. What is your point here?

In order to be able to resolve the problem, especially through a machine, you need a way to (observe and ) describe the entities concerned, and the process to resolve the problem. An ongoing tension in good design is how much you can leave out of the model. For example, look at spreadsheets. Myriads of problems have been effectively solved with spreadsheets (often by people who didn't know that they were programming), even though spreadsheets are innately horrible at really modelling any of the entities which those problems were about.

Comment on Re: The world is not object oriented

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: The world is not object oriented by tilly (Archbishop) on Jan 02, 2004 at 18:32 UTC
The point is that it is not always necessary, or useful, to have detailed internal models of the entities of interest in your program. You need to capture and manipulate the data of interest about those entities, yes. But that doesn't imply that you always need to build good models of the entities themselves.	[reply]
Re: Re: The world is not object oriented by hardburn (Abbot) on Jan 02, 2004 at 18:00 UTC
I think it's that spreadsheets leave a lot of "real programming" out, even though they may be computationally complete. A spreadsheet is a way of orginizing data, so the language used within should be specialized in handling data, like formatting it and running formulas on it. Excel doesn't need a full GUI API embedded in its scripting language, so it doesn't have one. This is generally considered a good thing. In other words, a spreadsheet has left a lot out of its scripting support, and this is a good thing. So good that people don't even realize that they're programming. ---- I wanted to explore how Perl's closures can be manipulated, and ended up creating an object system by accident. -- Schemer `: () { :\|:& };:` Note: All code is untested, unless otherwise stated	[reply] [d/l]


Think about Loose Coupling
	PerlMonks