Article about "The Post-OOP Paradigm"

Marco Paga mail at marco-paga.de
Thu Mar 13 19:36:18 UTC 2003


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thursday 13 March 2003 14:08, Gary Fisher wrote:
> >> ". . . although I don't know why "Post-OOP" because I think that it is
> >> an
>
> enhancement of the OOP itself."
>
> Marco;
>
> The article's title is perhaps a bit unfortunate; the "Post-OOP Paradigm,"
> according to the article, "do[es] not aim to supplant object-oriented
> programming [but to] refine or improve or reinvigorate it."  Post-OOP, in
> the author's sense, appears to mean "now that OOP is recognized as the
> baseline," not "in place of" but "built upon."

You say exactly the same but you use more words for that. I had a problem with 
the title because people may think that it is a whole new world that opens up 
right in front of them and that the OO paradigma is becoming worthless 
overnight.

>
> As for "AspectJ" and "Aspect Oriented Programming," those are given as "a
> case in point," an example of applying a Post-OOP paradigm but by no means
> the only choice(s).  More relevant, I think, are the references to the
> Pattern Language concept and to XP/extreme programming, both of which are
> well suited to (and perhaps in some ways dependant upon) OOP.

I can't imagine how XP could work without the OOP.  TDD alone could work in 
old prcedural languages, but I didn't gave it a try.

> In reading
> the article, it struck me that the author seemed to have a hazy perception
> of something in the distance very similar to portions of Squeak and
> Croquet. In other words, the world is once again running in a breathless
> effort to catch up with Alan Kay and those fortunate enough to work with
> him (including this list).

I like the metaphor. Squeak is a great tool for your mind. Alan is the one who 
has visions and I want to thank him. The problem of most programmes 
(including me, if  i would be one) is that we are mostly not open for new 
things. You can see it on slashdot for example. The people can't really see 
the advantage of a 3D system. They make jokes of it because for them a 
computer has to have a 2D GUI. But if you open up your mind you recognize 
that it is the only logic step towards the future. 3 thesis:
	
- -People think by using objects in their mind [Immanuel Kant, german 
philosopher].
	-Computer langauges went from machine code to OOP.
	-GUI's went from text-based to 2D.

I don't know what the development brings after OOP but the only way in GUI 
research is 3D displays. The computer comes again a step closer to the human 
mind.

>
> Gary Fisher
>

regards
marco
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+cN24lI77o82OdhIRAji5AJ96TgJLhHWKe3icC5V9GsEhHtHLBQCgmA6t
C7DHDtQ+0diez5DzYBuMJtc=
=o3xx
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list