3 ms·
That is no way in which I can agree with any of that. An object is a rather poor analogy for a real world entity. Real objects don't need to have methods declar
by Retra 9y ago
That is no way in which I can agree with any of that. An object is a rather poor analogy for a real world entity. Real objects don't need to have methods declared on them, they arise naturally from its state and from interactions with the state of other objects. Dogs don't have "wag tail" methods. Dogs don't have "name state" they are simply called names by people and have the facility to recognize their own name.
And as a poor analogy, a monad is also quite trivial.
- crimsonalucard 9y agoObjects all have state and certain behaviors attributed to the object. In common OOP vernacular this is known as state and methods. A real world analogy is a ball that can bounce and also has a bounciness coefficient, the ability to bounce is the method and the bounciness coefficient is the state. This makes sense. A burrito is a monad. Explain this.