Possibly as opposed to 'verbs' (e.g. processes, mutations, transformations, open-ended mappings - descriptions of what is being done)
Re:Why don't I like objects?
by throwawayplz on Friday November 18, 2011 @11:34AM
(#3252283)
bingo.
In my mind, a program is something that accepts input, does some processing on that input, and produces output. To me, the "programming" should revolve around the processing, rather than around the internal representation of the input, intermediate data, or output.
This is a fair point, but internal representation of the input can create drastic differences in how it's processed. Try writing an interpreter without tokenizing and parsing the text into some kind of AST. While this could be described as process, I think it proves that the internal representation of data matters.
Re:Why don't I like objects?
by throwawayplz on Monday November 28, 2011 @06:35PM
(#3288170)
No argument here - not arguing against data structures, or standards for manipulating them. Mostly saying I prefer "Programs that operate on ASTs" than "ASTs have methods to operate on themselves."
As opposed to what? LISP has lists, C has structs. These are both nouns, and they are represented as memory-backed data structures in exactly the same manner that objects are. The boxes on a turing machine tape are nouns. What mystical language or platform supports verb-only development? I am completely missing the point of your objection to nouns, here. Please enlighten me.