Gary --

At 2:37 AM +0000 11/18/01, Gary McGovern wrote:
>On the 9th October 2001
>Alan Kay wrote:
>
>  >However, I'm not an exclusivist. I think people should be able to run
>>  anything they need side by side and interoperably on their computers
>>  regardless of where they came from. That was one of the main points
>>  behind my particular conception of OOP (and how it would
>>  isomorphically relate to the ARPAnet) back in the 60s.
>
>Does anyone know if OOP being isomorphic to the ARPANET would mean 
>that an object would be like a node in a network ?

That was one of the motivations ...

>
>If so would that mean ideally, objects should follow the distributed 
>network model devised by Paul Baran and have redundancy in their 
>interconnections ? And, ideally, should messages be broken down into 
>message blocks all travelling along different paths to their 
>destination ?

No. The analogy did not extend to implementation details.

>
>As ARPANET evolved into the Internet by means of an additional 
>protocol layer, does that mean ideally that OOP should have an 
>additional protocol layer isomorphic to TCP/IP so that objects from 
>different languages can work together ?

Yes. That was one of the (philosophical) intents for that vintage. 
This is still a good idea, but most of the attempts so far (like 
CORBA) have been too heavy and hamfisted. One of these days ......

Cheers,

Alan
-- 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20011118/4de2d1ef/attachment.htm