3 ms·
> which started at the Norwegian Computing Center in the Spring of 1961 The date is wrong; only Simula 67 qualifies as an "object-oriented" language (the term
by Rochus 6y ago
> which started at the Norwegian Computing Center in the Spring of 1961
The date is wrong; only Simula 67 qualifies as an "object-oriented" language (the term was not used then though). The development of Simula 67 started in 1966. The author probably means the predecessor language, which did not have the properties associated with object orientation (moreover, it was a simulation language, whereas Simula 67 was designed as a general purpose programming language).
> Smalltalk-72 ... was clearly inspired by Simula, and took from Simula the ideas
of classes, objects, object references, and inheritance
Smalltalk-72 had no inheritance. Kay was aware of it but didn't like the idea. Only Ingalls added it to his Smalltalk-76 implementation.
Not the only inaccuracies as it seems.
- tabtab 6y agoPeople disagree widely on what OOP really is/means. I've read and been in many definition debates. Even defining what inheritance, polymorphism, and encapsulation is, is also a can of worms.
- Rochus 6y agoWell, some people disagree, as usual; not really an issue; if you need a theory and formal semantics, consult the standard work: https://www.amazon.com/Theory-Objects-Monographs-Computer-Science/dp/0387947752 https://www.amazon.com/Theory-Objects-Monographs-Computer-Sc....
- tabtab 6y agoThat's just one person's model. It may be an interesting model, but it's not necessarily "true" in the sense of acceptance. Type theory is also a model, not a definition. It's useful in the practical sense, but that doesn't necessarily mean it defines "types". Competing models may be developed.