Re: Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha)

glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>
Wed, 10 Sep 2014 01:48:46 +0000 (UTC)

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) bburshteyn@amsdec.com (Boris Burshteyn) (2014-09-09)
Re: Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming language available (alpha) gah@ugcs.caltech.edu (glen herrmannsfeldt) (2014-09-10)
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming langua kaz@kylheku.com (Kaz Kylheku) (2014-09-10)
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming langua martin@gkc.org.uk (Martin Ward) (2014-09-10)
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming langua anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2014-09-10)
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming langua martin@gkc.org.uk (Martin Ward) (2014-09-11)
Re: OOP vs imperative, was Hello v1.0.3 distributed programming langua anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (2014-09-15)
| List of all articles for this month |
From: glen herrmannsfeldt <gah@ugcs.caltech.edu>
Newsgroups: comp.compilers
Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2014 01:48:46 +0000 (UTC)
Organization: Aioe.org NNTP Server
References: 14-09-005
Keywords: books, OOP, comment
Posted-Date: 09 Sep 2014 22:04:38 EDT

Boris Burshteyn <bburshteyn@amsdec.com> wrote:


(snip)
> About Hello


> Hello is a general-purpose, object-oriented, imperative, protocol-agnostic
> language for distributed applications.


I have the books: "Handbook of Programming Languages" (a four
volume set), which are available used through Amazon or Half.com
for low prices. (And I recommend them to readers here.)


Volume 1 is Object-Oriented Programming Languages, and volume 2
is Imperative Programming Languages. (Vol. 1 is about twice the
size of vol. 2.)


For that reason, I tended to think of imperative as exclusive
from object-oriented. Not that you can't, or shouldn't, write
imperative programs in OO languages, but that it wouldn't be
used as a term in the description. (Or, why is it that vol. 2
isn't called "Non-Object Oriented Languages"?)


-- glen
[I've always thought of OOP as being orthogonal to imperative,
declarative, or functional. But I'm not sure how much it matters.
Are there any functional OOP languages? -John]

Post a followup to this message

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