[squeak-dev] Re: Are Objects really hard?
janko.mivsek at eranova.si
Sat Feb 11 13:12:27 UTC 2012
Let we remember that Smalltalk was designed for a kids, so "programming
is hard anyway" is in my opinion just too simplified answer.
While teaching new Smalltalkers I noticed that those without any
programming experience got it faster, specially comparing to those with
a relational DB experience. Who were and are still part of mainstream.
So, maybe it is better to say that established habits and mental models
in programmers heads never changed enough to get OO right?
To rephrase a bit differently: Hardly anyone is playing OO right because
OO was used too long on top of relational world and the ideas of pure OO
were forgotten and lost.
S, Schwab,Wilhelm K piše:
> Yes, programming is hard. It's even harder if one is poorly educated
> and not well read. I don't expect that everyone will have Smalltalk
> experience, but I would expect someone nearing completion of a PhD in
> computer science to have at least _heard_ of Smalltalk and Alan Kay. I
> recently met a very bright count-example to my expectation.
> The average programmer I meet, has no historical perspective, can't
> intelligently compare and contrast oo, structured and functional
> approaches to software implementation. All they seem to care about is
> this or that "technology" they saw in a glossy ad.
> Do you recall a talk Alan gave some years back at Stanford? He was on a
> good rant about how our computer science/engineering departments had let
> themselves be turned into Java certification mills, and ultimately
> uttered the words "what has happened to the mighty Standford?" I was a
> little surprised at his candor (took guts) and agreed with every word he
> The problem is PATHETIC education and self-preparation, IMHO.
> *From:* pharo-project-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr
> [pharo-project-bounces at lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Hernan
> Wilkinson [hernan.wilkinson at 10pines.com]
> *Sent:* Saturday, February 11, 2012 7:42 AM
> *To:* The general-purpose Squeak developers list
> *Cc:* VWNC; va-smalltalk at googlegroups.com; GNU Smalltalk;
> Pharo-project at lists.gforge.inria.fr
> *Subject:* Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] Are Objects really hard?
> Well... functional programming is hard and not everybody really
> understands it... structured programming is hard and not everybody
> really understood it... hmm at the end, programming is hard :-)
> He gives no reason about his stament nor "demonstration" of it
> neither... so he has a feeling, me too and a completely different one :-)
> On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 9:21 AM, Janko Mivšek <janko.mivsek at eranova.si
> <mailto:janko.mivsek at eranova.si>> wrote:
> Hi guys,
> Again one interesting topic for this weekend to discuss. David Nolen, a
> Programming  where he said:
> "...Yet I think Smalltalk still fundamentally failed (remember this is a
> programming language originally designed to scale from children to
> adults) because *Objects are really hard* and no-one really understands
> to this day how to do them right...."
> He links to Alan Kay post  back in 1998 where he talks about problems
> with inheritance:
> "Here are a few problems in the naive inheritance systems we use today:
> confusions of Taxonomy and Parentage, of Specialization and Refinement,
> of Parts and Wholes, of Semantics and Pragmatics..."
> Let we concentrate on broader "Objects are really hard and no-one really
> understands to this day how to do them right" claim and not merely
> inheritance, please.
> Best regards
>  http://dosync.posterous.com/illiterate-programming
> Janko Mivšek
> Smalltalk Web Application Server
> *Hernán Wilkinson
> Agile Software Development, Teaching & Coaching
> Mobile: +54 - 911 - 4470 - 7207
> email: hernan.wilkinson at 10Pines.com
> site: http://www.10Pines.com <http://www.10pines.com/>*
> Address: Paraguay 523, Floor 7 N, Buenos Aires, Argentina
Smalltalk Web Application Server
More information about the Squeak-dev