Re: In precision typing we trust

[Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>]

Niocláisín Cóilín de Ghlostéir <Spamassassin@irrt.De> writes:
> On Wed, 20 Aug 2025, Dmitry A. Kazakov wrote:
> |------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |"On 2025-08-20 19:18, Niocláisín Cóilín de Ghlostéir wrote:             |
> |                                                                        |
> |> So Ada is not an OOP language. Cf. Professor Alan Curtis Kay says:    |
> |                                                                        |
> |To be clear, I don't care what Prof. Kay says."                         |
> |------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
> Please stop misusing a term which Prof. Kay coined. If you do not care 
> about what Prof. Kay says, then you do not care about object orientation. 

Nonsense.  Alan Kay has his own definition of "OOP", but that
definition is not binding on the rest of us.

Smalltalk-style and Simula-style models can both reasonably be
called OOP.

If you happen not to like languages that claim to be OOP but don't
conform to Alan Kay's definition, that's fine, but I don't see
that there's a lot more to say about it.  If you want to discuss
the benefits of one flavor of OOP over another, I suggest that
comp.lang.ada is not the best place for that discussion.

You don't think Ada is OOP.  That's fine.  You're entitled to
your opinion.  But demanding that others must agree with you (and,
I suppose, with Alan Kay) is not useful.  You're not going to change
anyone's minds with appeals to authority.

> It is fair enough for some person to not care about object orientation. 
> Instead, incorrectly boasting about being an OO expert who writes in an OO 
> language when this languague - Ada - is not an OO language is a bad idea, 
> so please stop so.

No.

And please learn to use your newsreader properly.  Quoted text is
conventionally prefixed with "> ", not surrounded by ugly ASCII
boxes.  Using a radically different format for your posts just
makes them more difficult to read.

> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
> |"> Cf. a Smalltalk superclass can receive a subclass message for which no|
> |> superclass counterpart exists, so causing a crash. OOP is poop!        |
> |                                                                         |
> |I care even less about Smalltalk. It is about Ada. I explained that your |
> |suggestion about Ada subclasses evidently wrong."                        |
> |-------------------------------------------------------------------------|
>
> I made no "suggestion about Ada subclasses" in this thread, as I clearly 
> referred to an OOP language so clearly excluding Ada. Indeed, you actually 
> quote me saying: "So Ada is not an OOP language."!

This is comp.lang.ada.  If you want to compare Ada to other languages,
that's fine.  If you want to talk about other languages to the
exclusion of Ada, this is not the place.

-- 
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */