Stackexchange oop

1
"https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/367431/struct-functions-that-operate-on-the-struct-vs-oop-objects/367432 '....which is again about object (autonomous agents) collaborating to achieve some functionality.....'"

Neither the author nor his computer knows what this means in the context of a collection of functions taking the struct they are stuffed in as their first parameter, resulting in a restricted global.

Byte magazine
https://stackoverflow.blog/2020/09/02/if-everyone-hates-it-why-is-oop-still-so-widely-spread/ links to https://archive.org/details/byte-magazine-1981-08/page/n75/mode/2up (p.74 Object-Oriented Software Systems by David Robson(https://nippybox.com/v/f75b24), Object-oriented software systems provide the underlying design of Smalltalk.)

https://gist.github.com/iankronquist/eeafb55b139b3d8f7e244ce64d0f00f3#file-2-oop-classes-and-objects-md

entities

 * https://stackoverflow.com/questions/528234/does-procedural-programming-have-any-advantages-over-oop/3523069#3523069 I've programmed many projects using both OOP and non-OOP languages and approaches. I think the biggest problem associated with OOP stem from the failure of Java and languages derived from it to distinguish between values, unshared holders of values, and entities. OOP systems are far nicer than procedural ones when dealing with entities; not everything is an entity, though, and the strong design bias toward entities can make them less efficient when working with values and unshared value-holders. – supercat Nov 1 '13 at 18:48

'Entities', values and unshared holders of values as metaphor for what? A local variable is obviously not sharing its value globally, but how does this help us formulate premises to derive logically as opposed to arbitrarily that the procedures must be stuffed into the struct?

Ontology grounds epistemology, whatever knowledge claim is being made, it has to be tied back to the fundamental Dasein of the computer. Ontologically there are only data and functions in both stuffed and unstuffed procedural programming. googling a bit raganwald nouns it seems that with 'entities' is meant nouns, which Buko Obele insists doesn't exist inside of a computer.


 * weblog.raganwald nouns "...In the English language, we have the idea of a Subject and an Object in a sentence. For example, when we say “Jack loves Jill,” Jack is a subject and Jill is an object. Jack loves. Jill is loved. It’s the same in OO programs. Sometimes objects are actively doing things through their methods. Sometimes other object’s methods are doing things with them...."

The object's procedures are transforming data either local or that of its associated hash map. In the real world Jack and Jill could be "... actively doing things ....", ontologically the computer can only map inputs to outputs.

https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/231577/are-object-oriented-programming-languages-procedural

Oop terminology
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/16751269/oop-terminology-class-attribute-property-field-data-member

From "Object-Oriented Analysis and Design" by Grady Booch:

"....Class variable: Part of the state of a class. Collectively, the class variables of a class constitute its structure. A class variable is shared by all instances of the same class. In C++, a class variable is declared as a static member...."

Booch wrote "..An attribute denotes a part of an aggregate object, and so is used during analysis as well as design to express a singular property of the class..."

In Python an attribute are the key, value pairs of the object's hash map, which Python wraps in a dictionary. As such the dictionary is indeed part of the "aggregate object", with the procedures stuffed into the class or struct being the other part. The key,value pairs aren't going to transform themselves, the universe didn't make itself, they are transformed by the procedures stuffed into the class.

links
https://sasecurity.fandom.com/wiki/Oop_stackexchange (TO BE MERGED)