On Wed, Apr 18, 2007 at 08:00:07AM +0900, James Cunningham wrote:
> 
> That's not to say that prototype-oriented languages aren't neat. IO[1] 
> is one; TADS[2] is another, understandably not often considered (given 
> its limited scope). I've been playing with IO quite a bit the past few 
> days and, frankly, I'm just about in love it.
> 
> (There are no classes, and no inheritance; objects are cloned from 
> other objects and modified as necessary.)

That sounds really interesting.  I may have to look into that sooner
than I expected I would -- but still probably not this year, alas.  I
already have too many other programming learning projects lined up in
front of me, including reading at least five books about three different
languages (one being about Ruby).  That's a lot to take in, but the New
Year's resolution must be obeyed.

-- 
CCD CopyWrite Chad Perrin [ http://ccd.apotheon.org ]
Ben Franklin: "As we enjoy great Advantages from the Inventions of
others we should be glad of an Opportunity to serve others by any
Invention of ours, and this we should do freely and generously."