3 ms·
The problem is that he really doesn't have a point - only a straw man. He doesn't like inheritance, but he likes message passing. Well, guess what - Alan Kay, t
by yxhuvud 11y ago
The problem is that he really doesn't have a point - only a straw man. He doesn't like inheritance, but he likes message passing. Well, guess what - Alan Kay, the founder of the OO paradigm, also consider message passing to be the most important part.
This is at most a rant against the misguided implementation in certain mainstream languages. Not against OO in general.
- rumcajz 11y agoTrue. But in reality, when you hear term "OO" people mean Java and C++, not the orginal Alan Kay's concept. Sad but true.
- TheOtherHobbes 11y agoWhen you look at books that introduce OO, and languages that incorporate it, it's usually presented as is-a and extends and inheritance. The fact that Alan Kay meant something different is irrelevant. While you can build messaging and composition into most languages, they're usually considered application models in their own right, not core features. (Objective C is an exception, among a handful of others.) So I think it's a valid question - why do mainstream languages still present this model as a core feature when other models are less rigid, more expressive, easier to work with, and better candidates for language fundamentals?
- srean 11y agoThat's irrelevant for all practical purposes till the one true Scotsman shows up. I have noticed that none of the other programming paradigms need as much of a defense via the true scotsman falacy, inspite of those languages being far from their theoretic ideal.