Link Details

In his dissertation (PDF), Joe Armstrong argues that object-oriented approaches to concurrent programming are difficult to make work. This struck an odd chord with me, because I think it stems from a C++/Java-centric view of object-oriented, but if we go back to the source we have the following bits of definition of the nature of object-orientation: OOP to me means only messaging, local retention and protection and hiding of state-process, and extreme late-binding of all things. It can be done in Smalltalk and in LISP. There are possibly other systems in which this is possible, but I’m not aware of them.