[erlang-questions] Erlang "object-oriented" after all?

Jachym Holecek freza@REDACTED
Wed Nov 25 15:14:06 CET 2009

# Michael Turner 2009-11-24:
> I ran across a very interesting exchange with Alan Kay, who most likely
> coined the term "object-oriented programming."
>   http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~ram/pub/pub_jf47ht81Ht/doc_kay_oop_en
> If you'll excuse some (only slightly tendentious) editing of his remarks:
> ----
> "I thought of objects being like biological cells and/or individual
> computers on a network, only able to communicate with messages . . . .

No, you didn't. If you did, you would certainly have noticed that individual
cells/computers live concurrently and communicate asynchronously, which is not
how your objects behave.


SCNR, I still remember the disappointment of discovering (ages back) that
Objective-C objects didn't really fulfill the "they behave like real-world
objects" promise given by the (otherwise pretty good) NeXT book because
you couldn't "run objects in parallel" which sounded like something that
should obviously be possible.

	-- Jachym

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list