The type/object distinction and possible synthesis of OOP and imperative programming languages

[Ned Batchelder]

On 4/18/2013 9:24 PM, Mark Janssen wrote:
>> One of the nice things about OOP is it means so many different things to
>> different people.  All of whom believe with religious fervor that they
>> know the true answer.
> Here's a simple rule to resolve the ambiguity.   Whoever publishes
> first, gets to claim origin of a word and its usage, kind of like a
> BDFL.  The rest can adapt around that, make up their own word, or be
> corrected as the community requires.
>

You won't solve the problem of confusing, ambiguous, or conflicting 
terminology by making up a rule.  "Object-oriented" means subtly 
different things to different people.  It turns out that computing is a 
complex field with subtle concepts that don't always fit neatly into a 
categorization.  Python, Java, Javascript, Ruby, Smalltalk, Self, PHP, 
C#, Objective-C, and C++ are all "object-oriented", but they also all 
have differences between them.  That's OK.  We aren't going to make up a 
dozen words as alternatives to "object-oriented", one for each language.

You seem to want to squeeze all of computer science and programming into 
a tidy hierarchy.  It won't work, it's not tidy. I strongly suggest you 
read more about computer science before forming more opinions.  You have 
a lot to learn ahead of you.

--Ned.