5 ms·

Smalltalk is a small, uniform object orientated language,... "orientated"?? I hate to be a stickler, but you cannot say "object orientated" any more that you

• judk 12y ago
  https://www.google.com/search?q=orientated https://www.google.com/search?q=orientated How's the weather over there in America today? Arrogance is unbecoming. If you must be a jerk, you ought also be correct.
  • t1m 12y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5293748 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5293748 I am neither a jerk nor an American nor incorrect.
• maxerickson 12y ago
  I dislike orientated, but it is clear enough that it has achieved broad usage and is no longer a mistake.
  • t1m 12y ago
    I don't dislike the word "orientated" (it is a real word), nor would I discourage it's use on either side of whatever pond. It's simply not correct to use it in the particular and very specific "object oriented" context. Much like the often mis-camel-cased "SmallTalk", it is incorrect. Had Alan Kay coined the term "object orientated", I would use it without question.
  • mcguire 12y ago
    Very well, we gift you with the ability to utilize it as much as you like.
  • dragonwriter 12y ago
    "orientated" may be a perfectly cromulent word -- and may generally be a synonym for "oriented" -- but the phrase describing the programming paradigm is "object oriented" not "object orientated". Just as "functioning" is indisputably a good word and may be a rough synonym for "functional", but if you talk about about Haskell as a "functioning programming language", you may be correct in a sense, but it won't be as a statement about the programming paradigm it supports.