Re: Newbie question: Dylan and OOP?

• To: info-dylan@ai.mit.edu
• Subject: Re: Newbie question: Dylan and OOP?
• From: oodl@my-deja.com
• Date: Thu, 25 Jan 2001 22:15:02 -0500 (EST)
• Organization: Deja.com
• References: <003101c08732$7bfd8260$8a00000a@darwin.net>
• Xref: traf.lcs.mit.edu comp.lang.dylan:13028

In article <003101c08732$7bfd8260$8a00000a@darwin.net>,
  "Doug Ball" <doug@postsmart.net> wrote:
>
> I am a Dylan new comer and have not yet written any large applications
=
> in Dylan.  Do those of you who use OOP in other languages find Dylan's
=
> encapsulation of data and methods separately is helpful or that it =
> degrades OOP? =20
>

I'm sure others will talk about this in detail, but I feel that
multi-methods such as in Dylan are much more natural, convenient, and
flexible than the traditional style of OOP.  It's great to be able to
create methods applicable to a class without having to modify or
subclass the class.

If you look at Dylan, almost everything is an object.  I think that's
evidence that OOP hasn't been harmed.


Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/

• Re: Newbie question: Dylan and OOP?
• From: "Scott McKay" <swm@mediaone.net>

• Newbie question: Dylan and OOP?
• From: "Doug Ball" <doug@postsmart.net>

• Prev: Re: Newbie question: Dylan and OOP?
• Next: Newbie question: Dylan and OOP?
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread