Re: [stack] Some thoughts on Object Cat

On Sat, Apr 19, 2008 at 2:34 AM, John Nowak <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Apr 18, 2008, at 6:01 PM, Christopher Diggins wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 4:42 PM, Daniel Ehrenberg
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >
> >> In Io, for example, you might do
> >
> > I don't know IO
>
> You must learn Io before tackling a new prototype system. In
> particular, you must be aware of all of the problems inherent in Io's
> system. You must look at Self as well if you've not already.

I should be clear that I am not trying to design an entire prototype
system but simply introduce the minimal building blocks of one. The
very narrow problem I have is converting JavaScript into Cat, and I
want to do this with minimal changes.

> There's also another very interesting prototype language that's quite
> different from Io and Self called Kevo. There's very little
> information about it available, but what's there is worth looking at.
> In short, it does away with delegation. All objects are self-
> sufficient and new objects are created through the composition of
> existing objects. Objects have creation-time sharing, not lifetime
> sharing. It's very much in line with Wittgenstein's writings on
> prototypes.
>
> I did a fair bit of work (all evaporated) on prototype-based languages
> before working on Fifth. It does seem that we tend to be attracted to
> similar approaches.

Thank you for all the suggestions, I will look at those languages.

Cheers,
Christopher