Conversation

Notices

1. Christine Lemmer-Webber (cwebber@octodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Sep-2019 11:36:47 UTC Christine Lemmer-Webber

   • 叶恋様⛩️

   @karen But the real question is, what is an object? http://www.mumble.net/~jar/articles/oo.html

   MarkM's definition is closer to what you already do, because Mark's definition is closer to Alan Kay / the actor model type directions. But what "object oriented" means is very vague.

   At any rate, ocaps and functional programming can go along great, see http://mumble.net/~jar/pubs/secureos/secureos.html

   • Christine Lemmer-Webber (cwebber@octodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Sep-2019 11:58:33 UTC Christine Lemmer-Webber

     in reply to

     • 叶恋様⛩️

     @karen Nonetheless, I agree that targeting "object oriented programming" as a way to make audiences feel like the ideas are familiar is actually probably not as great an approach as it was, marketing-wise, a decade ago. And if ocaps aren't specific to what people *think of* as OOP, then that's adding confusion.

   • Coco (lain@pleroma.soykaf.com)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Sep-2019 12:11:25 UTC Coco

     in reply to

     • 叶恋様⛩️
     @cwebber @karen I think there's also the problem that the most popular "OOP" language is probably java, which isn't a very good example of the OOP that Smalltalk or Ruby do (with object/actors sending each other messages).
     Christine Lemmer-Webber repeated this.
   • Christine Lemmer-Webber (cwebber@octodon.social)'s status on Tuesday, 10-Sep-2019 12:12:08 UTC Christine Lemmer-Webber

     in reply to

     • Coco
     • 叶恋様⛩️

     @lain @karen Absolutely.