
Re: In favor of teaching "dot notation"
Posted:
Oct 17, 2012 5:38 PM



On Wed, Oct 17, 2012 at 1:34 PM, Paul Tanner <upprho@gmail.com> wrote:
> You started generalizing beyond coffee with your "Functional or "to > one" relationships are pretty well understood today, no need to imbue > them with mystical powers of action, or connotations of "belonging to" > or "contained within"" and such, and so the general definitions of > functions are now in play. >
You should think of objects as members of a set, or likewise members in memory. Each member has its attributes.
For example, if you're "2", a member of the set Z (integers) then your blueprint / template includes circuitry / a recipe for "adding".
You, "2" and another member of your set, say "5", both have the add method such that:
2.add(5) and/or 5.add(2) make plenty of sense. The Z type of object knows "adding", i.e. the behavior "to add" belongs to the integer type.
In reality, I'm writing in a generic dot notation that doesn't exist. 2 .__add__(5) is how you'd write in in Python, but really 2 + 5, with + triggering __add__, is the expected syntax.
> > And this includes not in terms just of what sets are and are not in > play but of how formulas are related to the use of the term > "function". Some uses of the term refer to the formulas that determine > the set of outputs, and even refer to the output itself as in "y is a > function of x" and so on. >
Sets tend to be overvalued thanks to RussellWhitehead. They allow only unique items, no duplicates. That's a restriction we don't always need.
In any case, I recognize sets as a good place to start using dot notation, with S.intersection(T) or S & T representing members in common, another set.
S.union(T) would be their combined elements with no duplicates. So again, an object with a behavior (union, intersection) and taking an argument (another set).
Python 3.2.3 (v3.2.3:3d0686d90f55, Apr 10 2012, 11:09:56) [GCC 4.0.1 (Apple Inc. build 5493)] on darwin Type "copyright", "credits" or "license()" for more information. >>> setA = {"A", "B", "C"} >>> setB = {"B", "C", "R", "Q"} >>> setA.union(setB) {'A', 'Q', 'C', 'B', 'R'} >>> setA.intersection(setB) {'C', 'B'}
More than your TI calculator will do, and for free. Free download.
Raspberry Pi is for like $35 and will do this, but you still need keyboard and monitor.
Parents? Any input? You live in a democracy remember? (ironic joke).
Kirby

