I have been looking for the original article which pointed out how OO
means different things and I finally stumbled on it today. So, here is
the link:
http://www.paulgraham.com/reesoo.html
So OO is not a well defined concept. Some people (eg. Abelson and
Sussman?) say Lisp is OO, by which they mean {3,4,5,7} (with the
proviso that all types are in the programmers' heads). Java is
supposed to be OO because of {1,2,3,7,8,9}. E is supposed to be more
OO than Java because it has {1,2,3,4,5,7,9} and almost has 6; 8
(subclassing) is seen as antagonistic to E's goals and not necessary
for OO.
The conventional Simula 67-like pattern of class and instance will
get you {1,3,7,9}, and I think many people take this as a definition
of OO.
-a
--
[email protected]
http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-lpsg
