Nice idea, but if you sat around waiting for your Y's to all qwuack in a
row you could turn old and gray. X for X's sake is often enough of a
reason for some. Also if X is robust eough at the onset it can be both its
Y and its X, think of it as bit complete with function, tv tuner, weather
report, and spare pair of snow shoes.
"I should get lunch" is in itself complete if you are taking the staement
as a state set of the system "I". "I" is a set of funstions and conditions
that include hunger, sleep rate, wetness, caffine level etc. "Lunch" in
this context would denote a procedure, or prcedures, that would possibly
be a agent to one of those conditions. It would be a safe bet to say that
"I" and hungry given the above statement.
Being that we are mostly a part of similar objects or classes of
humaness we have certian "inheritence" and thus when communicating can use
common language, procedures and or calls.
Of course this can onlybe stretch so far so long, thens its like a Mac Res
fork trying to discuss this weeks McLaughlin Group with a win32 .dll.
Your milage may vary...Does nto include tax or license fees.