Someone said (recently?) something like that: There are a lot of object-oriented programming languages, but nearly no object-oriented programming.
2012/1/10 Friedrich Dominicus <[email protected]> > Dennis Schetinin <[email protected]> writes: > > > Yes, we do: the (outer) world is getting worse and worse :) > No not really. See there is Objective-C in fifth place. That is not too > bad. JavaScript is up also and that is very much a Smalltalk in > disguise. I'd just would appreciate if Smalltalk was at least among the > first 10. At least that would be deserved. Anyway if you see Smalltalk > as "idea" supplier for Object-oriented languages, one can see that OO > really rules. Down to Transact-SQL all the languages offer more or less > support for OO-programming. Some even claim to be object-oriented ;-) > > There is not one language among the first 15 which does not offer > anything about OO. See even Visual Basic uses it. > > Well it's not that this may all too much, but it's still obvious. OO is > currently the "way to go". > > I for my part would appreciate some more support for functional > languages. But to some extend all of them at least support it > partially. What is astonishing is the rank of R. That I think can be > seen as "unexpected". > > > -- > Q-Software Solutions GmbH; Sitz: Bruchsal; Registergericht: Mannheim > Registriernummer: HRB232138; Geschaeftsfuehrer: Friedrich Dominicus > > -- Dennis Schetinin
