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

[Olivier Boudeville]

Hi,

This is surely a shameless plug, but, in terms of OOP with Erlang, one
might give WOOPER a try
(http://ceylan.sourceforge.net/main/documentation/wooper/), as it
basically provides most OOP constructs in order to rely on concurrent
instances in pure Erlang.

Best regards,

Olivier.

Jachym Holecek a écrit :
> # 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.
>
> Regards,
> 	-- Jachym
>
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list. See http://www.erlang.org/faq.html
> erlang-questions (at) erlang.org
>
>
>
>