In my book - Object Thinking - I referenced a lot of material from this
series of books re: Simula, Smalltalk, and C++ (Java was still absent
from the books) to make the point that a lot of so-called object
languages were never intended to be such and that the only reason they
made the claim was for marketing purposes. And because programmers
failed to see why the history, purpose, and philosophy of a language was
relevant to using the language, 98% of the programmers still have no
clue how to to OO.
davew
On Sat, 4 Aug 2007 18:53:18 -0600, "Tom Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> >From time to time, some of us have expressed an interest in the evolution of
> various computer languages. Turns our others shared our interest and did
> something about it.
>
> http://www.oreilly.com/pub/a/oreilly/news/languageposter_0504.html ---
> The
> History of Programming Languages
>
> -- tj
>
> ==========================================
> J. T. Johnson
> Institute for Analytic Journalism -- Santa Fe, NM USA
> www.analyticjournalism.com
> 505.577.6482(c) 505.473.9646(h)
> http://www.jtjohnson.com [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
> To change something, build a new model that makes the
> existing model obsolete."
> -- Buckminster Fuller
> ==========================================
============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org
