1. Forum
  2. Newsgroups
  3. comp.lang.fortran

  • Re: =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=9CType-Bound=20Procedure=E2=80=9D?=

    From pehache@pehache.7@gmail.com to comp.lang.fortran on Fri Mar 1 12:35:56 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.lang.fortran

    Le 01/03/2024 à 02:51, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
    On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 00:14:06 +0100, pehache wrote:

    "type-bound procedure" really tells what it is, much more than "method".

    It’s a mouthful though, isn’t it. Unlike the concise, and common, term used by every other OO language out there.

    Fortran is by far not an OO language, it just incorporates *some* OO
    features on the top of a procedural language. C++ isn't either, by the
    way.

    "method" is a terminology that comes from the OOP paradigm, and for
    instance in the OOP paradigm there is a conceptual difference between the "message" and the "method". In practice, the term "method" is wrongly used
    in many language to indifferently name a "message" or a (true) "method".
    By using its own (and self-descripting) terminology, at least the Fortran standard doesn't try mimicking in the wrong way a terminology from a
    paradigm that it only very partially implements.
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From pehache@pehache.7@gmail.com to comp.lang.fortran on Fri Mar 1 21:32:16 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.lang.fortran

    Le 01/03/2024 à 21:57, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :
    On Fri, 01 Mar 24 12:35:56 +0000, pehache wrote:

    Le 01/03/2024 à 02:51, Lawrence D'Oliveiro a écrit :

    On Fri, 1 Mar 2024 00:14:06 +0100, pehache wrote:

    "type-bound procedure" really tells what it is, much more than
    "method".

    It’s a mouthful though, isn’t it. Unlike the concise, and common, term >>> used by every other OO language out there.

    Fortran is by far not an OO language, it just incorporates *some* OO
    features on the top of a procedural language. C++ isn't either, by the
    way.

    “Procedural” and “object-oriented” are orthogonal concepts: nearly all
    “object-oriented” languages are also “procedural”.

    That's the point : very few languages fully follow the OOP paradigm
    without mixing it with the more classical procedural approach.

    Languages that introduce new ground-breaking paradigms can justify making
    up new terms for them (like “continuation” in Scheme). If you’re just borrowing concepts from other languages, making up your own terms just
    makes it look like you are trying to obscure the fact that you’re borrowing.

    Or, this is acknowledging that what was implemented was a rough
    approximation of the OOP paradigm, instead of pretending otherwise by
    wrongly using the terminology.

    Anayway, I find such debate completly pointless.


    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114
  • From Harold Stevens@wookie@aspen.localdomain to comp.lang.fortran on Sat Mar 2 09:07:59 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.lang.fortran

    In Message-ID: <z09Z-UsRM8hR1xEFAY4qih3XYDg@jntp> pehache:

    [Snip...]

    I find such debate completly pointless

    +1

    IMO, it's sourced largely in 'idle speculation' ...

    https://ludwig.guru/s/idle+speculation

    Been there, done that, not going back.

    YMMV; on the 7th day gawd made slrn scorefiles; yadayada ...
    --
    Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
    Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
    Really, it's (wyrd) at att, dotted with net. * DO NOT SPAM IT. *
    I toss GoogleGroup (http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/).
    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114