[PRL] Bob Harper's new blog

[Joe Marshall]

On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Duncan Mak <duncan at ccs.neu.edu> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 17, 2011 at 4:33 PM, Joe Marshall <jmarshall at alum.mit.edu> wrote:
>>
>> The reason not to teach OO style is because it encourages poor
>> programming practices, discourages simple uses of FP concepts
>> and prevents more complex uses of FP concepts.
>>
>
> I assume you're talking about a style embodied by languages like Java
> and C#.

Yes.  All these languages are ultimately based on Simula 67
(see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simula)

>  What if some language(s) instead?
>
> Would languages such as Smalltalk or Javascript also encourage poor practices?

I'm not familiar enough with these to say.

> If those languages were taught, is it fair to call them object-oriented?

Jonathan Rees has a great article about what `object-oriented' means.
You can read it at http://www.paulgraham.com/reesoo.html

It seems these days that `object-oriented' only means `Java'

-- 
~jrm