# OOP environment for Mathematica without additional packages

GROUPS:
 Hirokazu Kobayashi 7 Votes I'd like to introduce the OOP environment for Mathematica, with no-additional packages. Mathematica has many style of paradigm, however, OOP is the old but not sufficient backed-up environment for the Mathematica programming. Let's imagine the function group UpSet. UpSet has been seemed the basic idea relating OOP and the function being equipped from the first version but you can see the description of the function group is so small and short in the manual. Now, the UpSet function becomes the most important function because the function group is the key parts to establish OOP environment. With very small size pattern of CLASS constructed with SetDelayed UpSetDelayed, and Module leads us to OOP paradigm. This paradigm includes Encapsulation, inheritance, and Polymorphism in very straight forward manner. OOP on the Mathematica suits for Graphics, Events, and the Dynamic directly and give us new kind of power for Mathematica programming.Following is a Google slide showing my OOP idea. There is also an attached notebook.Mathematica OOP is expandable, and following sequence is a combination of OOP and the parallel functions. The method is very easy one as follows. (*prepare class*) pclass[nam_] := Module[{local = 0}, set[nam[x_]] ^:= local = x; get[nam] ^:= (local^2; Pause[0.1]); ] (*prepare object list*) AbsoluteTiming[object = Table[Unique[], {10}]]; (*create instances*) ParallelTable[pclass[object[[i]]], {i, 10}] // AbsoluteTiming; (*send message to set local values of instances*) ParallelTable[set[object[[i]][i]], {i, 10}] // AbsoluteTiming; (*send message to get results of instances*) ParallelTable[get[object[[i]]], {i, 10}] // AbsoluteTiming I hope you enjoy the new paradigm.Hirokazu Kobayashi Attachments:
11 months ago
9 Replies
 Kuba Podkalicki 1 Vote You can add something in the general topic on SE or in topics linked there:Which Object-oriented paradigm approach to use in Mathematica?
11 months ago
 Hirokazu Kobayashi 1 Vote This mind map is asking to reconsider on the Mathematica OOP, "how to" develop or/to "why to" develop it. Though, if we can achieve OOP with very small cost, the importance of "why" becomes lower one. My idea for the OOP requires very small cost, it means a few lines code is additional, so "why" will have small meaning in my OOP case. On the contrary, we can obtain large advantage from the OOP. The power of Mathematica comes from many characteristic points, and I think the various programming paradigm may be the largest one, so OOP will become the new large power source.
11 months ago
 Sam Carrettie 2 Votes It would be great I think if you would be able to explain your OOP idea in-post here or attache a notebook.
11 months ago
 Hirokazu Kobayashi 2 Votes Yes, I attached a notebook.
11 months ago
 David Fuller 1 Vote Hi,Apologies, yet I do not see how your approach promotes re-use, abstraction, encapsulation, or Typing of any sort. Despite your mention of design patterns, I do not see how it can, for example, be used to implement common patterns such as observer, visitor, or, most ubiquitously, singleton. Most importantly, I unclear how it helps me, in structuring code this way, reduce complexity or improve understanding. I did download your notebook. Unfortunately, this was not enough to actually understand what it is that you are proposing and what advantages there are in contrast to other approaches. I think much might be understandable were there a more in-depth write-up similar to that others have posted when putting forth their proposals for approaching OO in Mathematica. Regards, Dave
9 months ago
 One more Q: Why would I 'construct' a superclass specifically that I might 'subclass' it? That does not appear to make sense. I am assuming that your example is just unclear in some respect.