On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 6:53 AM, Michael Kay <> wrote:
> > However, I was more pointing to the fact that the word
> > "resource" is really whatever you make of it, including
> > objects (whatever you make "object" out to be). :)
>
> It's pretty clear to me that the people who chose the words "object" and
> "resource" were both trying to make the concepts as general as they could
> possibly make them, and therefore by intent they are equivalent. If there is
> a difference, then I don't think it's one that the originators of the terms
> intended.
Sure, that's fair. However, these days, at least around here, everyone
and their brother ends up taking at least one programming course just
to graduate from high school. As a result, for the casual observer
"object" carries with it semantic baggage that "resource" manages to
escape. That may not have been the "original intent", but that's the
modern reality.
--
Peter Hunsberger
