> Definitely not "directly", because Smalltalk messages are synchronous, whereas Erlang messages are asynchronous. I think you have a problem comprehending Eng

> Definitely not "directly", because Smalltalk messages are synchronous, whereas Erlang messages are asynchronous. I think you have a problem comprehending English. Directly does not mean exactly. Most of the rest of what you wrote is basically rehashing what I am claiming. > Considering he created the language, he might have had an idea of what he was talking about. No shit. However, he did not know as much about OO, or the history of OO, because he was at the time it was picking up steam very much busy building erlang. 2009 is around the time of the turning point in Joe's understanding of OO: http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2009-November/047748.html http://erlang.org/pipermail/erlang-questions/2009-November/0... > "swept up" Someone pointed out the full history of OO to him, he realized that his naive understanding of OO (Basically, C++ objects) was not complete, and he quickly grabbed on to his new understanding. Ok great. It also sounds diplomatic, and also now everyone who complained that his language was not OO and therefore bad can be shut up. What would you do? > but the only who has done this here is you Nope, so is Joe Armstrong.