Will any OOP grammar be supported?

[mySingleLive]

There are already some functional syntax in the design of streem.
Will the "class", "method", "inheritance" or any other OOP elements be in this language?
I think "everything is an object" is good in ruby. Can I use the "Stream", "Pipleline" as an object in runtime?

[alexispurslane]

No. I do not think that OOP is conducive to stream oriented programming. I'm not agains OOP in principle, in fact, I like Ruby, but in this context, OOP would feel slightly tacked-on and unwieldy. Objects, Methods, and Properties aren't suited to helping you think in a way that is based on filtering, mapping, transforming, and other stream oriented operations. That is why a more prototypal&functional approach might be better in this case. Prototypal is sort of a light wait version of OOP, so you could still program streem that way, and functional is inherently suited to list/stream based programs. (Just look at Lisp and Haskell).

[mySingleLive]

ok, you mean that streem also is an object-based language(of course, Flow-based), it may use a light object model such as prototype , but not use the class-base model like in Java.
But I think class is needful. Prototype is not more efficient than class in most cases.
Certainly, that is my individual opinion. I'm not against Prototype :P

[alexispurslane]

Maybe. But I think maybe that even Ruby's notion of classes might be a little unwieldy in this case. I was suggesting prototypal because I feel that it has all the advantages of classical, but with a little more of a lightweight, flexible feel to it. Also, classical OOP doesn't quite match up with the idea of a streem oriented language. Functional programming seems best, actually. But then again, OOP might be really cool in this case, with a few tweaks and new features! :D

[nickserv]

Functional programming and OOP can play together nicely, you just have to be careful about state. From my experience with JavaScript, I feel like there's not much that you can do with classes that you can't do with prototypes. Also, when dealing with items in streams, the prototyping could come in handy.

[alexispurslane]

Yeah... But maybe less weird/buggy syntax than js's for prototypes would do streem good.

[nickserv]

Agreed. While I actually like how JavaScript does OOP with prototypes, the whole .prototype stuff can be pretty confusing at first. Maybe some sort of prototype syntax similar to Class < SuperClass or Python's Class(SuperClass) could work for Streem.

[alexispurslane]

I like the Swift syntax for inheritance: Class: SuperClass. It looks less like your comparing classes or calling classes.

[dajoh]

F# does OOP quite well for a functional language.

[alexispurslane]

I like Haskell and OCaml's take on OOP. It's not quite OOP, but close enough to make OOP acolytes happy.

[nickserv]

@dajoh Out of curiosity, do you have any examples you'd like to highlight? I haven't used F#.

[mySingleLive]

Coffeescript replace the prototype with the “class” syntax.
It means that “class” is more practical. But prototype also can be used anywhere.

[alexispurslane]

I really don't think this should be closed. We haven't solved anything yet.

[notduncansmith]

I like @mySingleLive's idea to follow in CoffeeScript's footsteps. class MyClass to create a prototype, and MyClass::myMethod to get a method from the prototype.

[alexispurslane]

👍