3 ms·

> But Kay was the one to popularize objects as we think of them today. Not actually. Kay's view of OO is pretty different from what we understand of OO today;

by Rochus 1y ago

> But Kay was the one to popularize objects as we think of them today. Not actually. Kay's view of OO is pretty different from what we understand of OO today; the general understanding is closer to Simula 67; see also the IEEE milestone: https://ethw.org/Milestones:Object-Oriented_Programming,_1961-1967 https://ethw.org/Milestones:Object-Oriented_Programming,_196.... Ironically Smalltalk-76 and onwards also corresponds more with the Simula 67's than Kay's view. > Development of Smalltalk started in 1969 You mix that up with Kay's PhD. A good and reliable history about the origin and evolution of Smalltalk can be found in the excellent 2020 paper by Ingalls: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3386335 https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3386335

chao- 1y ago
>Kay's view of OO is pretty different from what we understand of OO today Indeed, in his own words, from 1998: https://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKayOnMessaging https://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKayOnMessaging He also gave at least two conference talks where he explained how his view of objects sending messages was in line with his background in molecular biology: he thought of the objects like cells sending messages via exchanging various chemicals. I don't have either on hand, but I believe one time he shared this was in an interview with Joe Armstrong.
- Rochus 1y ago
  > he explained how his view of objects sending messages was in line with his background in molecular biology I don't think he has a formal education in molecular biology (didn't find any (independent) evidence), and I don't think the analogy he draws between his view of messaging and biochemical signaling really works. His messages are directed to specific objects, whereas in a biological system, enzymes and the like are dumped into the bloodstream indiscriminately without a specific target. Biological systems, in constrast to software systems, lack centralized orchestration, relying on emergent behavior from local interactions instead.
  - Jtsummers 1y ago
    > I don't think he has a formal education in molecular biology (didn't find any evidence) At least the ACM believes he does. https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/kay_3972189.cfm https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/kay_3972189.cfm
    - Rochus 1y ago
      Thanks for the hint. That must then have been one of the earliest undergraduate courses in molecular biology in the USA (most universities did not have dedicated undergraduate majors or courses in "molecular biology" in the sixties), and it's a pretty strange combination with mathematics. Early molecular biology education was typically embedded within biochemistry, genetics, or general biology programs.
      - cxr 1y ago
        It's interesting that Wikipedia lists studies and a degree in molecular biology, started first at Bethany College prior to his draft in the Air Force and finished in Boulder from University of Colorado, whereas the Vita section of his HTML-ified thesis lists simply "biology" at Bethany College and lists anthropology when he returned to school in Boulder. It shows a BS in only math. <https://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/inf/pdfs/kay.htm https://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/inf/pdfs/kay.htm>
        Rochus 1y ago
        Good reference, thanks; still more things that just don't add up.
  - 0x445442 1y ago
    Yeah, I've watched many of his talks and this has always bothered me. The biological model would be almost entirely asynchronous messaging without direct coupling. Something more like sending messages to an event bus.
    - 1y ago
AceJohnny2 1y ago
Indeed, here's a email from Alan Kay about how his perspective is about "messaging" between objects: https://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-October/017019.html https://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998... (edit: derp, this is directly cited in TFA) Also, I loved this interview/discussion between Kay & Joe Armstrong, inventor of Erlang, where the topic comes up again (because Erlang is also a lot about messaging between agents) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhOHn9TClXY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhOHn9TClXY
- chao- 1y ago
  Are you me? The timing of our posts the biggest coincidences I've experienced in quite a while.
  - AceJohnny2 1y ago
    yes, except for the goatee.

by Rochus 1y ago

chao- 1y ago

>Kay's view of OO is pretty different from what we understand of OO today Indeed, in his own words, from 1998: https://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKayOnMessaging https://wiki.c2.com/?AlanKayOnMessaging He also gave at least two conference talks where he explained how his view of objects sending messages was in line with his background in molecular biology: he thought of the objects like cells sending messages via exchanging various chemicals. I don't have either on hand, but I believe one time he shared this was in an interview with Joe Armstrong.

Rochus 1y ago
> he explained how his view of objects sending messages was in line with his background in molecular biology I don't think he has a formal education in molecular biology (didn't find any (independent) evidence), and I don't think the analogy he draws between his view of messaging and biochemical signaling really works. His messages are directed to specific objects, whereas in a biological system, enzymes and the like are dumped into the bloodstream indiscriminately without a specific target. Biological systems, in constrast to software systems, lack centralized orchestration, relying on emergent behavior from local interactions instead.
- Jtsummers 1y ago
  > I don't think he has a formal education in molecular biology (didn't find any evidence) At least the ACM believes he does. https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/kay_3972189.cfm https://amturing.acm.org/award_winners/kay_3972189.cfm
  - Rochus 1y ago
    Thanks for the hint. That must then have been one of the earliest undergraduate courses in molecular biology in the USA (most universities did not have dedicated undergraduate majors or courses in "molecular biology" in the sixties), and it's a pretty strange combination with mathematics. Early molecular biology education was typically embedded within biochemistry, genetics, or general biology programs.
    - cxr 1y ago
      It's interesting that Wikipedia lists studies and a degree in molecular biology, started first at Bethany College prior to his draft in the Air Force and finished in Boulder from University of Colorado, whereas the Vita section of his HTML-ified thesis lists simply "biology" at Bethany College and lists anthropology when he returned to school in Boulder. It shows a BS in only math. <https://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/inf/pdfs/kay.htm https://www.chilton-computing.org.uk/inf/pdfs/kay.htm>
      - Rochus 1y ago
        Good reference, thanks; still more things that just don't add up.
- 0x445442 1y ago
  Yeah, I've watched many of his talks and this has always bothered me. The biological model would be almost entirely asynchronous messaging without direct coupling. Something more like sending messages to an event bus.
  - 1y ago

AceJohnny2 1y ago

Indeed, here's a email from Alan Kay about how his perspective is about "messaging" between objects: https://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-October/017019.html https://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998... (edit: derp, this is directly cited in TFA) Also, I loved this interview/discussion between Kay & Joe Armstrong, inventor of Erlang, where the topic comes up again (because Erlang is also a lot about messaging between agents) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhOHn9TClXY https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fhOHn9TClXY

chao- 1y ago
Are you me? The timing of our posts the biggest coincidences I've experienced in quite a while.
- AceJohnny2 1y ago
  yes, except for the goatee.