From: rolo <rohitlodha@...>
Date: 2004-04-10T02:38:24+09:00
Subject: Re: Object oriented does not mean class oriented


What do we gain by this?  What is it that you want to achieve?

    robert

[rolo] Conceptually, we understand that there are only objects even class is an object. we also understand that class is a object with a factory method new to create more objects. It carries definitions of objects. Now when me make it true object oriented we overcome the barriers of syntax like one followed by class definitions styles and are only guided by protocol of object to object interactions like message passing. 

following the concepts of Aspect orienting programming, there is a concept of Object Team. We define Teams and Roles, which are 'kind of' class objects.

EJB of java also like to define beans which are kind of objects. Forcing every body to follow only class declarations limits the expectations of any programming language. I see programming language as a means to express and communicate with man and machines. The better and easier it can be for both man and machines the better programming language it can be.

Once we allow redefinitions of ways to declare and write classes we can achieve few things because the syntax itself becomes a dynamic quantity. It will lead us to Adaptive programming and will allow various programming languages to be bundled together, though bundling of other programming languages do not seems to me as a very remarkable gain.

The most remarkable gain would be that new data types definition will become simpler and easier. It will allow us to generate sub-programming languages for domain specific programming. 


rolo