Frank, et al:
Before someone goes and says, "but we have inheritance -- the group intercepts messages not received by objects in the group, the card receives from the group, etc." -- there is a certain level of inheritance in place, and Rev does have many characteristics of an object-oriented language. But I for one would not pretend to call it an actual object-oriented language until we can define our own classes, subclass those classes *and* the built-in classes (such as button, field, group, card, stack...), and so on. There needs to be a degree of scripter-defined polymorphism present, as well.
I must admit that I fell prey to this line of thinking for the longest time, feeling "Give me an OOP concept, and I can script that functionality." It took me some time to realize the difference is that the functionality is already built in to the OOP when you open the box.
Still, one can script much of OOP functionality fairly easily, and one is not prevented from incorporating OOP concepts in one's design; so I'd label RunRev as "quasi OOP".
Example: if Frank's example involved changing a button's name instead of its label,
on nameChanged oldName,newName if char 1 of newName is not a number then set the name of me to oldName end nameChanged
Rob Cozens CCW Serendipity Software Company
"And I, which was two fooles, do so grow three; Who are a little wise, the best fooles bee."
from "The Triple Foole" by John Donne (1572-1631)
_______________________________________________ use-revolution mailing list use-revolution@lists.runrev.com http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
