Re: New language

• To: info-dylan@ai.mit.edu
• Subject: Re: New language
• From: Andreas Bogk <andreas@andreas.org>
• Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 13:30:02 -0400 (EDT)
• Organization: There Is No Cabal.
• References: <8fe8kp$pl2$1@nnrp1.deja.com>
• Xref: traf.lcs.mit.edu comp.lang.dylan:12015

pohanl@my-deja.com writes:

> Then someone comes along and says, hey, why not package multiple
> functions
> and data into a structure.  And that is how classes got started (which
> lead to object oriented languages like C++ and java).  Now when you

This might be what it looks like to the causual observer, but in fact,
as proven by Common Lisp and Dylan, is not what object-oriented
programming is all about.

Rather, the interesting aspects are abstraction through type
hierarchies, and through polymorphic functions.

Andreas

-- 
"Anyone need a DVD decrypter for Linux?
dig @138.195.138.195 goret.org. axfr | grep '^c..\..*A' | sort \
| cut -b5-36 | perl -e 'while(<>){print pack("H32",$_)}' | gzip -d"
  -- James Brister

• Re: New language
• From: "Frank A. Adrian" <fadrian@uswest.net>

• New language
• From: pohanl@my-deja.com

• Prev: Re: [FD] creating classes at runtime
• Next: Re: problems with HD 1.2 under WinNT 2000
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread