Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by chriswarbo 4181 days ago
How exactly can OO be "shoehorned" into a language which is already OO?
1 comments
CmonDev 4181 days ago
He meant proper OO as opposed to the shanty prototype one.
link
chriswarbo 4181 days ago
Since you've not defined it, I'll assume "proper OO" is referring to Alan Kay's formulation: http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?HeInventedTheTerm

In that case, his opinion on class vs. prototypes is that it misses the point: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-...

As an aside, prototypes are strictly more powerful than classes, so they're no "shanty": http://web.media.mit.edu/~lieber/Lieberary/OOP/Delegation/De... (esp. section 6)

link
jbergens 4181 days ago
The problem is for anyone who sees prototype OO as a better solution. They kind of give their blessings to the other OO, which is a bit sad. (edit: spelling)
link
cgcardona 4181 days ago
I see it the other way--prototype OO was given the blessing of the Creators of the language back in the mid 90s when it was created.

Though the people who 'get' prototypes swear that they're the greatest paradigm ever you will still get a huge amount of people coming in from other languages which find the prototype chain awkward and prefer to think in complex class hierarchies.

These people who choose to create their abstractions out of classes are in no way 'wrong.' To each their own.

Adding `class` syntactic sugar is just standardizing on something which many people already do every day.

link