> First of all, let me state that I'm a complete Clojure noob. > Still, I thought that Clojure's multimethods were a completely > valid OOP approach. > Q uoting Alan Kay:
When I have made that point (about Alan Kay's vision) to certain OOP evangelists, I have been told that Alan Kay's vision of OOP is no longer relevant, or that I have misunderstood it. I do not mean to drag you into a long debate, nor do I wish to waste your time, but if you are very patient, and you have a lot of free time on your hands, you can read what I wrote (very long and badly edited) here: http://www.smashcompany.com/technology/object-oriented-programming-is-an-expensive-disaster-which-must-end and then check out the various ways people responded on Hackers News (I feel that I was misunderstood, though I take the blame, as my essay was not as clear as it should have been): https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8420060 A dozen people wrote me private emails after I posted that blog post, and several of them asked me how to get inheritance of functionality in something like Clojure. I am writing a follow-up post (which I promise will be shorter and better edited than the original post) and one thing I am doing is writing examples of how you could imitate the OOP style using Haskell or Clojure (which apparently I should have done in the first post). --- lawrence On Monday, October 27, 2014 2:11:54 PM UTC-4, Rogerio Senna wrote: > > On Mon, Oct 27, 2014 at 2:21 PM, larry google groups <lawrenc...@gmail.com > <javascript:>> wrote: > > >> The differences between OOP and multimethods should be stressed. >> >> I just wrote about this on my blog, and those who mostly worked with OOP >> kept wondering, how do you get inheritance of functionality? >> > > > First of all, let me state that I'm a complete Clojure noob. Still, I > thought that Clojure's multimethods were a completely valid OOP approach. > > > Q > uoting Alan Kay: > > OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and hiding >> of state-process, and extreme late-binding of all things. It can be done in >> Smalltalk and in LISP. There are possibly other systems in which this is >> possible, but I'm not aware of them. > > > Notice that he intentionally left "inheritance" out from that definition. > > That means that the class based, C++ style that we usually call "OOP" is > actually just one particular kind of OOP - so the way that JavaScript, > Common-Lisp CLOS and, as I see it, Clojure multimethods do it are also > valid "OOP" as well, I believe. > > Am I right? Or am I missing something here? > > > Thanks in advance, > > Rogerio. > > > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
