Re: Perferred OO System? Alternatives to even OO?

[Adrian Perez <moebius.lists@...>]

On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 16:24:21 -0700
"Zed A. Shaw" <zedshaw@zedshaw.com> wrote:

> Looks good.  What's the license on it though.  Seems people do three
> things in Lua:
> 
> 1) Write their own OO system.

Haha ;-) Here's mine, for Lua 5.1:
http://code.connectical.net/kicker/modules/object.lua

> 2) Avoid the words "[Cc]lass", "[Oo]bject", and "new"

No "[Cc]lass" keyword, but I'm using "Object", because of the
prototypical nature of the system. That's also why I use "clone()"
instead of "new()".

> 3) Not put a license on it.

lol, so mine is different because it *has* the licensing terms
embedded: the MIT license, like Lua itself (I really appreciate that
Lua made me discover this nice and concise license :-P).

> Are there particular reasons for this?  Like, "class" is reserved or
> clashes?

I suppose it's just a matter of personal preferences :-P

-- 
$ cat /usr/include/sys/errno.h
#define EPERM     1  /* Operation not permitted   */
#define ENOENT    2  /* No such file or directory */
#define ESRCH     3  /* No such process           */
#define EINTR     4  /* Interrupted system call   */
[...]
#define EMACS   666  /* Editor Too Large          */
$

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature