[1358] in java-interest
Re: "perform:" and Java
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Charles L. Perkins)
Wed Aug 30 23:13:27 1995
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 95 19:21:31 -0400
From: "Charles L. Perkins" <clp@home.HarvardSq.com>
To: johnm@emf2-003.emf.net
Cc: <Tako.Schotanus@bouw.tno.nl>, Schotanus@home.HarvardSq.com,
Tako@home.HarvardSq.com, java-interest@java.sun.com
This attitude scares me whitless (just like senior citizen drivers :-).
Just because something sounds neat and useful doesn't mean that it's a good
idea to add to a language. This attitude is what has brought C++ to the
horribly obnoxious state that it is today.
As much as I applaud the above sentiment (and agree with it), in this case
it is a little mis-directed. A dynamic language which already has some meta-
features (reflective ones as well), which allows: new("class" + "name"),
and separates interfaces from implementations so cleanly screams out for the
natural complement that perform: represents. I would claim it was part of
the same orthogonal set to which dynamically linked classes and late binding
all belong. That's why I wanted a few Sun/Java souls to chime in about this.
Patiently awaiting word from the designers,
Charles
-
Note to Sun employees: this is an EXTERNAL mailing list!
Info: send 'help' to java-interest-request@java.sun.com
