Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)

On 29 Mar, 21:47, tim <T...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Mar 2008 12:01:10 -0700, Alistair wrote:
> > 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.
>
> This remains true.. But as I understand it a fair amount of the DNA that
> does not produce proteins and thus was classified as junk DNA does in
fact
> produce RNA,

Some would be for RNA encoding but the majority of 'junk' has no known
function with  much appearing to be 'blank' encoding.

> which has an im****tant role in regulating cell functions. For
> example, a lot of the mutations that separate humans from their
relatives
> seem to be for RNA that controls brain functions.
>
> Tim- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -