[E-Lang] real live newbie caught trying to learn E

[Mark S. Miller]

At 11:14 AM 10/23/2001 Tuesday, Marc Stiegler wrote:
>(actually, the "class" keyword had been around for a
>long time, but one outcome of the Upheaval was using the keyword
>ubiquitously).

Reading the transcript was agonizing for me as well, but in a different way. 
It made me wonder about the wisdom of this decision.  E started out 
communicating clearly what it's object definitions are: nested lambda-like 
function definitions with built in message dispatch.  The Ode, which 
presents a bottom up explanation 
http://www.erights.org/elib/capability/ode/ode-objects.html , still reflects 
this way of explaining things.  No pretending to be class-based, and no 
magic "new" verb that appears in use but not in the definition.  Scott, 
SteveK, Ppooko, please pretend to be virgins once again, read the 
explanation at the above URL, and speculate on whether Walnut's early 
introduction of "class" is helping or hurting.  Thanks.

Ppooko, please tell Zooko that this may be a good example of why a #3 syntax 
philosophy (see 
http://www.eros-os.org/pipermail/e-lang/2001-June/005337.html ) may lead to 
an easier to learn system than a #2 philosophy.

Btw, unless the reaction is violently in favor of the original strategy, I'm 
inclined to leave this one alone.  We've got to move on.  But I'd just like 
to understand whether the move to "class" was a mistake, so we can avoid 
similar mistakes in the future.


        Cheers,
        --MarkM