Re: New assembly language instructions to support OO languages?

Tony wrote:


> To me, it seems like "reducing everything to a function" may be a bit
> dated given that OO languages are the thing nowadays. Can anyone
> imagine any new potential assembly language instructions that would
> make implemention of OO languages easier? (Not just necessarily the
> function thing, but anything).
>
> Tony


It's been done :)


http://www.brouhaha.com/~eric/retrocomputing/intel/iapx432/cs460/


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_iAPX_432


OO isn't a panacea, and the need for backwards compatibility is what I think
restricts most interesting experiments from becoming the future these days.


You also can't really solve the Platypus effect with most OO-like systems.
http://www.advogato.org/article/83.html


A lot of what people are implementing is not what the creator (Alan Kay) of
the term "object-oriented programming" intended to be associated with his
idea.


http://userpage.fu-berlin.de/~ram/pub/pub_jf47ht81Ht/doc_kay_oop_en


It's not really something that Kay invented either though (see Simula) - he
refined it in his own ways at XEROX PARC with a team. It still sort of
lives on though in a different form via Squeak (Smalltalk).


Kay also drew a lot of inspiration as I understood from Douglas Engelbart --
the man that invented the mouse in the 1960's.


George

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.