[gokr]

Well, when I talk about polymorphism I of course mean the ability in the language to create first class polymorphic constructs. Hardwired things like [1] doesn't count :)

Further, I had read the article [3] and it seems to me that he indeed "rejected" OO in large parts after having worked with Smalltalk. That's quite intriguing (or astounding!) to me - since I agree that most so called OOP languages misses a lot of the story when compared to Smalltalk.

Personally I find polymorphism and encapsulation together with strong abilities of abstraction to be the key aspects of OO and I have never found any language that captures these things better than Smalltalk.

At the same time I also find Rebol's focus on DSLs to be very interesting - and as many may know this was also a big part of Alan Kay's FONC project.

In Spry I want to combine both. In contrast to Carl I embrace the original ideas of OO as manifested in Smalltalk. However, I couldn't care less of a lot of the overcomplicated mess that so called other OOP languages have created since then, and I also think the beauty of Smalltalk can be captured differently, for example without classes.