> I think the heart of OOP is the opacity, the fact that we (for some definition of we) aren't allowed to poke around in the state directly At the heart of OOP

> I think the heart of OOP is the opacity, the fact that we (for some definition of we) aren't allowed to poke around in the state directly At the heart of OOP is being able to throw a message out into the world and maybe find another actor willing to respond to it. It is not so much that you are not allowed to poke around in the state of other actors, but that you fundamentally cannot know what other state exists without breaking the paradigm. > So I think I'd start there, not by adding procedures. Agreed. A thin veneer over internal state does not fix a break in the paradigm. > if you give me a Doodad, I can't do anything with that unless you provide procedures. You aren't even given Doodad, per se. Under OOP, you just send the message out there. If Doodad chooses to respond, then so be it. If Doohickey responds instead, such is life. Who responds is not your concern.