Mon Mar 24 15:47:00 CET 2003
C. Reinke wrote:
> [for those who haven't come accross Petri nets, see:
> http://www.daimi.au.dk/PetriNets/ ]
I had forgotten about these. Will read up to jog my memory.
>Sounds pretty general-purpose (and concurrent) to me.
I like the sounds of the concurrent processes interpretation.
OO seems so different than what he described. I never did
any SmallTalk, but read the SmallTalk 80 book to learn about
design. I liked it at the time, but the class hierarchy was so
big it seemed difficult to become proficient. I really wanted to
code it after reading the book, though.
> "I made up the term 'object-oriented', and I can tell you I didn't
> have C++ in mind" - Alan Kay, OOPSLA '97
Bingo. That is very funny!
>Another way I like to phrase it: users are not dummies, they are
>domain experts (though their domain is usually not computers or
>software); they don't want computer experts to give them lots of
>words (applications), they need a tailor-made language in which they
>can express their domain knowledge to tackle their daily problems.
I like this. I had overlooked the fact that the users are domain
experts. That is a good concept to keep in mind.
More information about the erlang-questions