ZombieChicken

From my understanding, yes. Personally, I’ve seen so many different definitions of “OOP” (most of which were incoherent), I developed my own definition of what an ‘object’ is, and just go on with life.

In a proper PnPRPG/Tabletop RPG game, a truly spectacular blunder feels like a success to the person who failed. Walk into a bar and critfail both your Communications check, and the “Oh crap, I failed that badly. Can I save this by doing ______?” follow-up Communications check? You think you did fine, but now the entire bar thinks you are a truly crazy person, and treat you with respect only because they think you’re going to shiv them in the neck if they get out of line.

Are they? It’s a known fact that they do that kind of thing. If they were good, wouldn’t their involvement not appear, or would be, at best, a rumor?

Or do as Alan Kay wants and start calling it “Message-Oriented Programming”.

“I’m sorry that I long ago coined the term “objects” for this topic because it gets many people to focus on the lesser idea. The big idea is “messaging”.”

https://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/1998-October/017019.html