To Rev or not to Rev

[Pierre Sahores]

Geoff and All,

And in about polymorphism... : HC and REV are full able to let us 
design any complexes recursive procedures we can need inside our 
xtalk's apps, even in using polymorhism, hash-tables stuffs and so 
on...

Best, Pierre

Le 2 mai 05, à 16:28, Geoff Canyon a écrit :

> I think by that classification Rev _is_ object-oriented: 
> "ObjectOrientedProgramming. A program execution is regarded as a 
> physical model, simulating the behavior of either a real or imaginary 
> part of the world." Sounds like Rev to me.
>
> Nevertheless, I always refer people to another quote on the same web 
> site -- Ward Cunningham's regarding HyperCard and OO: "Sure HyperCard 
> is object oriented. You just don't get to pick the objects."
>
> Setting those aside, Rev lacks several characteristics most people 
> consider inherent to OO. That doesn't make it bad or good, 
> necessarily.
>
>
> On Apr 30, 2005, at 7:51 AM, Frank D. Engel, Jr. wrote:
>
>> A quick Google search reveals this, which may be helpful as far as 
>> classification of languages:
>>
>> http://c2.com/cgi/wiki?NygaardClassification
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-revolution mailing list
> use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>