home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!psinntp!internet!sbi!pivot-sts!rwk
- From: rwk@silver.sbi.com (Richard W. Kreutzer Consultant)
- Newsgroups: comp.lang.scheme
- Subject: Re: R^4RS Authors Comments on Dylan
- Message-ID: <RWK.92Aug17143148@silver.sbi.com>
- Date: 17 Aug 92 18:31:48 GMT
- Sender: news@pivot-sts.sbi.com
- Distribution: comp
- Organization: Olympus Software, Inc.
- Lines: 27
- Nntp-Posting-Host: silver
-
- Reguarding Scheme OO and Dylan...
-
- Since reading about the language Self, I have been impressed with the
- advantages of a "classless" approach to object oriented programming. Having
- little or no direct experience with Self or any other classless OO language, I
- was impressed by the clear and persuasive advantages of the classless approach
- expressed by the authors of Self.
-
- While Dylan's class system appears to be well designed, its inability to
- disambiguate (next-method) on classes derived from multiple bases is a
- significant problem (IMHO). Dylan's "non-object" orientation, a concern
- previously expressed in this thread, precludes one from calling/sending
- methods to "self" (aka "this") without explicit reference to the desired
- "self" object. Moreover, I am not convinced that class based OO languages are
- preferable to classless languages and would very much like to see a discussion
- of a classless Scheme OO system (since I am not a fan of the "Smalltalk style"
- syntax of Self).
-
- Perhaps there has not yet been enough experience with classless languages to
- make a fair comparison?
- --
-
- --
- Richard W. (Dick) Kreutzer
- Net: rwk@quark.sbi.com CIS: 70702,2174
- Voice: +1(801)571-2446 FAX: +1(801)571-2448
- Mail: Integra Software Corp.; 1378 Jasmine Avenue; Sandy, UT 84092 (USA)
-