4 ms·
Objective-C added OOP to C. C++ did not. C++ is neither an OO language nor a C superset.
by 9rx 7mo ago
Objective-C added OOP to C. C++ did not. C++ is neither an OO language nor a C superset.
- CyberDildonics 7mo agoIf you make up your own definitions things can be anything you want and have or not have any label.
- 9rx 7mo agoAbsolutely. That's why it is best to stick to the already established definitions. Kay was quite explicit about what "object-oriented" meant when the term was uttered for the first time; including specifically calling out C++ as not being object-oriented. And yes, we all know the rest of the story about how the C++ guys were butthurt by that callout and have been on a mission to make up their own pet definition that allows C++ to become "object-oriented" ever since. I mean, who wouldn't want to latch onto a term that was about the unique features of a failed programming language that never went anywhere?
- CyberDildonics 7mo agoDon't you think it's a bit silly to keep rehashing tribalistic arguments that people moved on from 40 years ago?
- 9rx 7mo agoOnce someone offers up the replacement name so that we can continue to talk about what "object-oriented" referred to 40 years ago — and still refers to today, sure. Nobody cares about the exact letters and sounds. But, until then, no. It is still something we regularly talk about. It needs a name. And lucky for us it already has one — and has had one for 40 years.