4 ms·
> Alan Kay tried to convince people (and succeeded with many) that he owned the term object-oriented, because he was the first person to use it. He wanted it me
by infinite8s 4y ago
> Alan Kay tried to convince people (and succeeded with many) that he owned the term object-oriented, because he was the first person to use it. He wanted it mean only his ideas, but from very early on people were applying it to a variety of ideas that were developing concurrently in the sixties and seventies, his being only one flavor among others.
Do you have any citations for this? From the quotes I've seen, it sounds like he regrets using the term 'object-oriented' for the approaches he was thinking of:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev//2002-April/038745.html http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev//2002...
- dkarl 4y agoI think you get a good idea of his attitude in the first sentence: > terms are also "colonized" for political and fad reasons His version of the story always casts aspersions on alternative OO ideas and frequently, as here, implies devious and mercenary motives to people who were simply working along different lines. Don't get me wrong, Alan Kay was brilliant, but like many visionaries he had utopian expectations for how his ideas would impact the world. When the future didn't materialize the way he envisioned it, he committed to this narrative that his ideas had been robbed of their success by imposter ideas that stole away attention and energy. It's a shame because there's a much more positive story to be told about the proliferation of different OO ideas that mutually influenced each other and succeeded in different ways.