is squeak really object oriented ?

Sean Charles bibbers at onetel.net.uk
Thu May 29 16:11:59 UTC 2003


On Thursday, May 29, 2003, at 02:50 PM, jan ziak wrote:

> On Thu, 29 May 2003 09:48:12 +0000, Sean Charles wrote
>>>
>>> form sequences of those signs - but this is sufficient to express any
>>> number
>>> you can think of.
>>>
>> NO NO NO NO NO! Come on, get your facts right, this is basic computer
>> theory, BINARY is NOT capable of expressing any number you can think of.
>> Variable BCD yes but binary NO.
>
> i mentioned sequences of bits also...perhaps we have misunderstood each 
> other.
>
>
>
NO, even an endless sequence of binary bits won't represent some numbers 
exactly. In order to represent *any* number exactly requires another level 
of interpretation to be placed upon those bits. Thus, while the 
representation may be binary, the implied context is not binary, it might 
be IEEE format which happens to use 32 bits.

We are now entering the realms of information theory methinks, and here is 
my favourite story which hopefully conveys the above point a little more 
clearly...

One day, on a beach far away, a newly-wed couple are walking on the beach 
on the first day of their honeymoon. They stop to watch the sea lapping 
little waves up the beach and over the sea-weed. They look down and see a 
piece of wood with strange markings.

"Look how the sea has etched that pattern into it" they remark and go on 
their way.

A while later, a man is to be seen pacing up and down: his is extremely 
upset. He happens upon the piece of wood and, crying loudly, sinks to his 
knees and beats his head in deep despair.

The piece of wood you see bore the name of his brothers fishinbg-boat; 
lost at sea in a bad storm two nights ago........


The story basically sums up why I think SETI is a waste of time and money,
  the best thing they have done is produce a cool looking screen-saver.

Sean Charles.



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list