On Thursday, June 12, 2003, at 12:29 PM, PhiHo Hoang wrote:
>     Anyone who still doubts that OOP is inherently modular,
>     should have a look at this. The graphics system is really cool.
>
>     Hey, there is even a Ph. D dissertation on its kernel:
>
>           http://www.cs.inf.ethz.ch/~muller/PieterMuller.pdf

They seem to be using the term "active object" for what languages like 
Act1 and ACBL/1 call "actor". Is "active object" the proper term? I'm 
not faulting them for their choice of terms. I'd just like to know the 
proper term to use myself.

Cheers,
Steve
OSX freeware and shareware: http://www.dekorte.com/downloads.html