Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)

"Alistair" <alistair@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:69c88c59-3e42-484a-8321-67452c60d5fd@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On 29 Mar, 06:18, tim <T...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>> On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 01:15:20 +0000, docdwarf wrote:
>>
>> > 'Technically' there is even less difference between what you cite and
>> > between A-negative and B-positive human blood... now I'd appreciate
it 
>> > if
>> > you'd keep away from dealing with transfusions.
>>
>> > DD
>>
>> Ditto. No more than one bit might separate a program that works
correctly
>> and one that fails catastrophically. This is a relevant analogy,
because
>> DNA is code.
>>
>
> Well said Tim. Most DNA is in fact what is called 'Junk DNA' with no
> discernable function and with sections repeated without rhyme or
> reason.

I think you need to qualify that to "without rhyme or reason that we can 
discern at this time."

While it may be that much of what is there is left over from previous
failed 
evolutionary attempts (much as some maintenance programmers don't remove 
code that has become irrelevant "just in case it is ever needed again"),
and 
is not required for the organism to function in its present incarnation, 
that certainly doesn't mean we can decisively state it is there without 
rhyme or reason.

We know that people can function "normally" even when quite large pieces
of 
their brains are removed, but we don't advocate removing brain parts in
the 
interest of general efficiency...:-)

Pete.
-- 
"I used to write COBOL...now I can do anything."