4 ms·

I'd take the risk of pointing out that the state of the art OOP is still to be found in Smalltalk.

by bnastic 15y ago

hencq 15y ago
And perhaps Self edit: Even though I haven't used it, Newspeak (http://newspeaklanguage.org/ http://newspeaklanguage.org/) seems really interesting as well. Though I'm not sure if it's still being actively developed. Gilad Bracha's blog (http://gbracha.blogspot.com/search/label/Newspeak http://gbracha.blogspot.com/search/label/Newspeak) explains a lot of the concepts. I find it especially interesting because like Smalltalk and Lisp it seems to be based on a small set of powerful primitives.
draegtun 15y ago
I'd say CLOS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp_Object_System http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp_Object_System) & Moose (http://moose.perl.org http://moose.perl.org) myself. However I do like Prototype based OO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-oriented_programming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-oriented_programming) and especially its implementation in Io (http://www.iolanguage.com http://www.iolanguage.com)
- billitch 15y ago
  Well, CLOS may be state of the art in very fine designed,exhaustively redefinable, roll-your-own aspect oriented programming, and the most exhaustive object oriented paradigm for the most fluid pragmatic language ever. But I doubt you'll find useful sources for programming style searching for it. If you are implementing an object-oriented paradigm for your programming language, it's a very recommendable source to discover what can possibly be done with OOP.
  - draegtun 15y ago
    But I doubt you'll find useful sources for programming style searching for it. How about AOP? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect-oriented_programming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect-oriented_programming). I think both CLOS & Moose push you more towards this programming style.
- GVRV 15y ago
  As someone working with Moose recently (and not really loving the experience), can you elaborate why it made your cut?
  - draegtun 15y ago
    For my Perl reasons: * Nicer to write than standard Perl OOP, ie. less boiler plate, quicker prototyping, covers bizarre corner cases, etc * Moose is pretty much de-factor OO framework for Perl now, ie. big community drives its development and usage. * Perl6 synergy, ie. Moose heavily inspired by Perl6. Makes it easier when I switch between writing perl5 & perl6 code. For reasons why I think Moose makes the cut: * Roles - ala Smalltalk traits. see http://search.cpan.org/dist/Moose/lib/Moose/Manual/Roles.pod http://search.cpan.org/dist/Moose/lib/Moose/Manual/Roles.pod * Types - See http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1558882 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1558882 (and also follow links back from it). * Method modifiers - See my AOP comment elsewhere
cies 15y ago
Now I, in turn, like to take the risk of being buried in down votes to say that Ruby is the new Smalltalk. (how many have written mostly smalltalk last year?)
- glassx 15y ago
  You're not alone ;) "I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java. I just didn't know it would be called Ruby." – Kent Beck

I'd take the risk of pointing out that the state of the art OOP is still to be found in Smalltalk.

by bnastic 15y ago

I'd take the risk of pointing out that the state of the art OOP is still to be found in Smalltalk.

hencq 15y ago

And perhaps Self edit: Even though I haven't used it, Newspeak (http://newspeaklanguage.org/ http://newspeaklanguage.org/) seems really interesting as well. Though I'm not sure if it's still being actively developed. Gilad Bracha's blog (http://gbracha.blogspot.com/search/label/Newspeak http://gbracha.blogspot.com/search/label/Newspeak) explains a lot of the concepts. I find it especially interesting because like Smalltalk and Lisp it seems to be based on a small set of powerful primitives.

draegtun 15y ago

I'd say CLOS (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp_Object_System http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_Lisp_Object_System) & Moose (http://moose.perl.org http://moose.perl.org) myself. However I do like Prototype based OO (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-oriented_programming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prototype-oriented_programming) and especially its implementation in Io (http://www.iolanguage.com http://www.iolanguage.com)

billitch 15y ago
Well, CLOS may be state of the art in very fine designed,exhaustively redefinable, roll-your-own aspect oriented programming, and the most exhaustive object oriented paradigm for the most fluid pragmatic language ever. But I doubt you'll find useful sources for programming style searching for it. If you are implementing an object-oriented paradigm for your programming language, it's a very recommendable source to discover what can possibly be done with OOP.
- draegtun 15y ago
  But I doubt you'll find useful sources for programming style searching for it. How about AOP? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect-oriented_programming http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspect-oriented_programming). I think both CLOS & Moose push you more towards this programming style.
GVRV 15y ago
As someone working with Moose recently (and not really loving the experience), can you elaborate why it made your cut?
- draegtun 15y ago
  For my Perl reasons: * Nicer to write than standard Perl OOP, ie. less boiler plate, quicker prototyping, covers bizarre corner cases, etc * Moose is pretty much de-factor OO framework for Perl now, ie. big community drives its development and usage. * Perl6 synergy, ie. Moose heavily inspired by Perl6. Makes it easier when I switch between writing perl5 & perl6 code. For reasons why I think Moose makes the cut: * Roles - ala Smalltalk traits. see http://search.cpan.org/dist/Moose/lib/Moose/Manual/Roles.pod http://search.cpan.org/dist/Moose/lib/Moose/Manual/Roles.pod * Types - See http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1558882 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1558882 (and also follow links back from it). * Method modifiers - See my AOP comment elsewhere

cies 15y ago

Now I, in turn, like to take the risk of being buried in down votes to say that Ruby is the new Smalltalk. (how many have written mostly smalltalk last year?)

glassx 15y ago
You're not alone ;) "I always knew that one day Smalltalk would replace Java. I just didn't know it would be called Ruby." – Kent Beck