4 ms·

I might be wrong, but my understanding is things happened backwards from that. OOP tried to solve the problem of how to get tons of devs working on huge projec

by dhimes 8y ago

I might be wrong, but my understanding is things happened backwards from that. OOP tried to solve the problem of how to get tons of devs working on huge projects at the same time; java came along to try to be an awesome OOP environment, so Java became the standard.

dnautics 8y ago
What is or is not OOP is actually fuzzy. When it boils down to it erlang's actor model is basically an implementation of smalltalk objects (but don't tell joe Armstrong that). Elixir's module/struct/protocol looks awfully like OO in the post bjarne soustrop era. Conversely, python's objects feel anti-object since you're passing self all the time (aka dot notation is a weaksauce syntactic sugar)... You could easily model this behavior if you really wanted in Julia, for example, with a custom operator (not that you should) function Base.^(o <: Object, fn) (a...) -> fn(o, a...) end
- lliamander 8y ago
  Joe already knows. He and Alan Kay had a talk about it. It was great.
dnautics 8y ago
> OOP tried to solve the problem of how to get tons of devs working on huge projects at the same time I am skeptical of that history. Simula and smalltalk were academic endeavors long before lots of devs were working on projects, Java became popular because it was a portable C++ which had no pointers and garbage collection.
- pjmlp 8y ago
  Smalltalk was being adopted across the industry when Java came around, the big difference was that JDK was free beer and one of the big Smalltakers (IBM) rebooted their environment into Eclipse, while jumping into Java bandwagon.
  - vram22 8y ago
    Was it Visual Age for SmallTalk which became Visual Age for Java which later became Eclipse? Vaguely remember reading something like that earlier.
    - pjmlp 8y ago
      Yes. With Gamma, one of the pattern book authors, as architect on Eclipse team.
      - vram22 8y ago
        Interesting, thanks.
  - testrun 8y ago
    That is seriously rewriting history. Smalltalk was not big in any shape or form in business in the mid '90s.
    - pjmlp 8y ago
      Like Java ended up being afterwards no. It surely had lots of consulting opportunities, though.

by dhimes 8y ago

dnautics 8y ago

What is or is not OOP is actually fuzzy. When it boils down to it erlang's actor model is basically an implementation of smalltalk objects (but don't tell joe Armstrong that). Elixir's module/struct/protocol looks awfully like OO in the post bjarne soustrop era. Conversely, python's objects feel anti-object since you're passing self all the time (aka dot notation is a weaksauce syntactic sugar)... You could easily model this behavior if you really wanted in Julia, for example, with a custom operator (not that you should) function Base.^(o <: Object, fn) (a...) -> fn(o, a...) end

lliamander 8y ago
Joe already knows. He and Alan Kay had a talk about it. It was great.

dnautics 8y ago

> OOP tried to solve the problem of how to get tons of devs working on huge projects at the same time I am skeptical of that history. Simula and smalltalk were academic endeavors long before lots of devs were working on projects, Java became popular because it was a portable C++ which had no pointers and garbage collection.

pjmlp 8y ago
Smalltalk was being adopted across the industry when Java came around, the big difference was that JDK was free beer and one of the big Smalltakers (IBM) rebooted their environment into Eclipse, while jumping into Java bandwagon.
- vram22 8y ago
  Was it Visual Age for SmallTalk which became Visual Age for Java which later became Eclipse? Vaguely remember reading something like that earlier.
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    Yes. With Gamma, one of the pattern book authors, as architect on Eclipse team.
    - vram22 8y ago
      Interesting, thanks.
- testrun 8y ago
  That is seriously rewriting history. Smalltalk was not big in any shape or form in business in the mid '90s.
  - pjmlp 8y ago
    Like Java ended up being afterwards no. It surely had lots of consulting opportunities, though.