On Tue, 6 Jan 2026 14:29:28 -0500 Mark Bratcher <[email protected]> wrote:
> It's not easy diving into OOP at this level without general OOP > concepts and purpose, which are independent of the language being > used. Thanks you for your detailed post! Although I _am_ aware of the "4 Pillars of OOP", I'm not intimately familiar with them. I've been hacking code since 1981 or so - never using OOP - but using Perl, C, PHP, various Lisps & Schemes. The Smalltalk code I wrote was intended to created a function/method that could be called in order to return a temperature using a particular scale. I was not interested in what "universe" the "object" lived in that I needed the temperature for. Just like I the `abs' function doesn't care what its given argument pertains to. `abs' is simply a built-in function, or one living it a "math" library/module/package. It seems to me that OOP insists on creating mini universes for everything and linking these universes together using inheritance, as well as creating convoluted rules as to what can done, seen, how and when. Maybe it's just the Smalltalk syntax that is getting in my way. I'm going to try some other OOP supported language to see if the whole process becomes more intuitive for me. Thanks for yours and others' input! -- Duke
