View this PageEdit this PageAttachments to this PageHistory of this PageHomeRecent ChangesSearch the SwikiHelp Guide
Hotspots: Admin Pages | Turn-in Site |
Current Links: Cases Final Project Summer 2007

Sum2001 Midterm Review: Historical Context

1. is it Alan Kay? or may be Ole-Johan Dahl and Kristen Nygaard.
2. James Gosling, SUN Microsystems; JAVA
3. Implementation of a drawing program, known as Sketchpad allowed users to create objects that could be changed or "manipulated as distinct objects". Moreover, it allowed for a set of "Master drawings" which allowed for the defining of a set of "instance drawings" that behaved just like that of the "Master drawings", but you could change these drawings as independent objects, while also being able to change the master and those changes being reflected throughout the instances. As this translates to OO programming, being able to create instances of objects, manipulate them, and them being able to take on the appearance of the parent is a core concept.
On 1, the question is who named OO. Who was it? Does anyone have an answer for 4? How about more answers for 2? -Lex Spoon
2. Bjarne Stroustrup; C++
4. I believe it is structured programming(?). An example would be C.
Fortran is structured and it's older than C.
Structured programming was very popular at the time, but actually C was just developing itself. What languages were already used by structured programmers of the time?

1. Alan Kay - ref:
2. Bjarne Strousupt C++
James Gosling Java
3. Structural programming, FORTRAN
Structural programming was based on the idea of breaking the task down into smaller pieces (subroutines), defining a set of data structures, grouping the pieces and then coding it. (would Functional Programming, i.e. LISP, count? Or was the word FP not around back then?)
- Josh Stephens

Functional programming is different from both OO and structured programming, and functional programming was certainly around back then. It would be a big stretch to say FP was popular, and it would be a small stretch to say LISP is functional, but from the right point of view they would both be true. -Lex Spoon

I guess COBOL could be considered functional language too. I can't really think of an older language.

I invented the term 'object oriented programming' and I can tell you I didn't have C++ in mind. –Alan Kay

No, COBOL isn't a functional programming language. Functional programming languages suggest or even require a style where there are no variable assignments, I/O operations, or any other side effects. -Lex Spoon

Link to this Page