What are OOP's Jargons and Complexities?

Anno Siegel anno4000 at lublin.zrz.tu-berlin.de
Wed Jun 1 13:03:48 CEST 2005

Tassilo v. Parseval <tassilo.von.parseval at rwth-aachen.de> wrote in comp.lang.perl.misc:
> Also sprach Dale King:
> > David Formosa (aka ? the Platypus) wrote:
> >> On Tue, 24 May 2005 09:16:02 +0200, Tassilo v. Parseval
> >> <tassilo.von.parseval at rwth-aachen.de> wrote: 
> >> 
> >>> [...] I haven't yet come across a language that is both statically and
> >>>strongly typed, in the strictest sense of the words. I wonder whether
> >>>such a language would be usable at all.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Modula2 claims to be both statically typed and strongly typed.  And
> >> your wonder at its usablity is justified.
> >
> > I used a variant of Modula-2 and it was one of the best languages I have 
> > ever used. That strong, static type checking was a very good thing. It 
> > often took a lot of work to get the code to compile without error. 
> > Usually those errors were the programmers fault for trying to play fast 
> > and loose with data. But once you got it to compile it nearly always worked.
> I am only familiar with its successor Modula-3 which, as far as I
> understand, is Modula-2 with uppercased keywords and some OO-notion
> bolted onto it (I still recall 'BRANDED' references). 
> I have to say that doing anything with this language was not exactly a
> delight.

I've been through Pascal, Modula2 and Oberon, and I agree.

These languages had an axe to grind.  They were designed (by Niklas
Wirth) at a time of a raging discussion whether structured programming
(goto-less programming, mostly) is practical.  Their goal was to prove
that it is, and in doing so the restrictive aspects of the language
were probably a bit overdone.

In the short run they succeeded.  For a number of years, languages of
that family were widely used, primarily in educational programming
but also in implementing large real-life systems.

In the long run, the languages have mostly disappeared from the scene.
It has been discovered that "structured programming" is possible in
about any language.  It turns out that programmers prefer the
self-discipline it takes to do that in a liberal language over the
enforced discipline exerted by Papa Pascal and his successors.


More information about the Python-list mailing list