You might find the page on prototype based languages in Rainer Blome's Bookmarks interesting:
That page has some really good info. I've summarized it in this chart:
http://www.slip.net/~dekorte/Proto/Chart.html
Steve
Thanks!
Having published two books with Peter Coad on object model patterns and Java design, I want to get to the heart of object-oriented thinking. Having seen Smalltalk-80 on an Alto at Xerox during the summers of 1981 and 1982, and reading from cover to cover many times my first computer book "Smalltalk-80: The Language and its Implementation," (Yes...I have my original Blue book sitting here on my bookshelf at work) I want to move pure object thinking forward into the formal analysis and design activities. I'm tired of having to build class oriented object models that to be understood, are too rigid. When I add dynamic capabilities (object inheritance, i.e. composition and delegation) to a class-oriented model, the diagrams become harder to understand and therefore communicate less. My goal is a simpler notation that expresses the powerful ideas that were presented in languages like Self, NewtonScript, and ObjectLogo. Models built using this pure object notation can still be implemented in languages like Smalltalk and Java through the use of notation-to-implementation patterns. The only way to grow complex systems is with simple principles. Complex notations are counter productive when trying to model complex systems.
If this is a crazy idea...let me know.
Mark
You might find the page on prototype based languages in Rainer Blome's Bookmarks interesting:
That page has some really good info. I've summarized it in this chart:
http://www.slip.net/~dekorte/Proto/Chart.html
Steve
___________________________________________________________ Mark Mayfield mmayfield@netexplorer.com
"The best way to predict the future is to invent it."
Alan Kay
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org