is squeak really object oriented ?
jan ziak
ziakjan at host.sk
Thu May 22 21:33:49 UTC 2003
On Thu, 22 May 2003 22:15:44 +0200, Andreas Raab wrote
> Yayy! What beautiful heretic questions ;-)))
>
> BTW, if you are interested in this area you should give eToys a try.
> They do many of the things you're describing, e.g., make objects
> tangible and therefore become more oriented to dealing with objects
> instead of text input.
>
perhaps. i want to ask then, in the example with the numeric list (below and
previously)
1. is it possible to create a new scripting tile representing my list ?
2. is not the eToys subsystem of squeak somewhat "incomplete" (in terms that
it does not allow to work with all classes visible in the browser for
example) ?
> Cheers,
> - Andreas
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> > [mailto:squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org] On
> > Behalf Of jan ziak
> > Sent: Thursday, May 22, 2003 9:55 PM
> > To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
> > Subject: is squeak really object oriented ?
> >
> >
> > hi. I've got a strange question: is squeak really an object
> > oriented system
> > or it only claims it is? the point of the question is that
> > instead of working
> > with objects, i work mostly with text. the objects are in
> > fact only in my
> > head, as a consequence of reading sources of objects which are in the
> > browser. but the objects are not tangible, i cannot see them.
> > for example,
> > let's take an instance of an OrderedCollection: this object
> > is in fact not an
> > object but a textual representation of it, I cannot see the
> > collection on my
> > workspace and must simulate all its behavior on my own and
> > imagine it in my
> > head.
> >
> > another problem is that when i am writing the source code of
> > an object, i do
> > not work with objects again. i only manipulate text and imagine those
> > objects, but the objects are not on my workspace. i think that object
> > oriented programming should look like working with objects
> > and not with text.
> >
> > so, is squeak for work with objects or with text ?
> >
> > another example: suppose that, after 3 hours of hard
> > experimentation, i have
> > finally obtained a list of numbers which contain the results of my
> > experiments. the numbers are of great signifance to me
> > because i am totally
> > unable to replicate them (because i do not preciselly
> > remember how i obtained
> > them for example). let the numbers be concentrated in an instance of
> > OrderedCollection. so i have an ordered collection instance
> > and numbers in
> > it. as next, i want to incorporate my numeric list in a
> > source code of some
> > class. wouldn't it be logical to simply insert a reference to
> > my list into
> > the source code in places where i want to use my list object?
> > in think that
> > the squeak system answers: "no it wouldn't. you must make a textual
> > representation of your object and ...".
> >
> > so, are we working with objects or just manipulating text ?
> >
> > giving objects names and them using those names is just one
> > way of how to
> > interconnect those objects. i want to work with objects not
> > with their names,
> > so why should i give names to objects anyway.
> >
> > jz.
> >
> >
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|