newlispfanclub.alh.net

I'm happy (and relieved) to announce the release of "What the FOOP?", a video overview of the current state of FOOP.

m i c h a e l

Very aesthetic video!

I have seen that Rob Britton had presentation on FOOP few days ago:

http://lovehateubuntu.blogspot.com/2010 ... ation.html

Nice video, thank you Michael.

To clarify, when you use the colon operator, the colon operator sets up "self" to point to the instance object so that methods within a context use it? What methods and attributes does the default Class have? How is it different than just making a context from scratch?

This is great, thanks michael. I'm enjoying this, about halfway through.

I have to ask: does all your typing make music? Does this mean you can write newLISP with your eyes closed?

I once considered the idea of sonic debugging. The theory was that I could tell more by listening to the music made by the flow of the program than by looking at output. (Although different coloured output could do a similar job...)

And is that your voice, or did you hire some voice talent?

Great video!

Kazimir wrote:Very aesthetic video!

I have seen that Rob Britton had presentation on FOOP few days ago:

Thanks, Kazimir! There are a number of meanings for FOOP, some of them quite distasteful! When I first considered FOOP as a name back in 2006, I found a reference to Functional Object-Oriented Programming in a 1994 paper about a language named TOOPL. By that time, though, I'd already grown fond of the name FOOP. I just like the sound of it.


---

Ted wrote:Nice video, thank you Michael.

You're very welcome, Ted.

Ted wrote:To clarify, when you use the colon operator, the colon operator sets up "self" to point to the instance object so that methods within a context use it?

Yes. self always refers to the object that was sent the message.

Ted wrote:What methods and attributes does the default Class have? How is it different than just making a context from scratch?

Initially, Class only contains the default constructor. If you intend to overwrite the default constructor anyway, then you would gain nothing over starting from scratch.


---

cormullion wrote:This is great, thanks michael. I'm enjoying this, about halfway through.

My pleasure. I hope it's not too long, though.

cormullion wrote:I have to ask: does all your typing make music? Does this mean you can write newLISP with your eyes closed?

I wish I could type that well! This is the new version of line-commander, a newLISP program that I used to make the Shell Games videos. It takes a script of the edits (including mistakes) and, using terminal commands, produces the output. For the sounds, I'm using newLISP-GS.

cormullion wrote:I once considered the idea of sonic debugging. The theory was that I could tell more by listening to the music made by the flow of the program than by looking at output. (Although different coloured output could do a similar job...)

I had a similar idea while rewriting line-commander, although not in the context of debugging. I wondered if well-written code would produce better-sounding "music" than poorly written code. I have a lot of the latter ;-)

cormullion wrote:And is that your voice, or did you hire some voice talent?

Yes, the voice belongs to yours truly. Perhaps I have a future in voiceovers? :-)


---

itistoday wrote:Great video!

Thank you, Greg! I'm glad you liked it.


---


I'm currently working on the script for the next FOOP video. In it, I intend to go into more depth about subjects like inheritance and polymorphism. Please let me know if there's a subject or topic you would like to see addressed, and I'll try to incorporate it into the video. I'll be adding more about self as a result of Ted's question.

m i c h a e l

m i c h a e l,

That's just freakin' awesome! Great job. I am green with envy, for I wish I could do that. I love the soundtrack, the musical typing, the voice over (yes, you do have a future in this, but I'm sure newlisp programming is more fun), the transition effects and timing with your narration, and the "Ken Burns effect" zooming in and out of the terminal session. It is a wonderful exposition of elementary FOOP concepts. I tip my hat off to you.

(One small error: at 14:43 you can see that the point given in the constructor and the point reflected by the REPL (constructor) are different. But that's small potatoes compared to the work you put into the wonderful production.)

BTW, doesn't the musical typing sound like it comes from some of the music in the original Planet of the Apes movie? :-)

Rick, wonderful to hear from you! As always, your kind and thoughtful words bring me great encouragement. The club is a certainly a poorer place without your presence.

rickyboy wrote:(One small error: at 14:43 you can see that the point given in the constructor and the point reflected by the REPL (constructor) are different.

Wow, you really are paying attention. Great eye! Thank you for catching this. It should be a simple fix (I hope).

rickyboy wrote:BTW, doesn't the musical typing sound like it comes from some of the music in the original Planet of the Apes movie? :-)

That is exactly what I thought, too! All those great seventies movies with their trippy music and even trippier video effects.

Again, thanks for your inspiring response.

m i c h a e l

The error Rick pointed out has been fixed and the new video uploaded. Thanks again, Rick!

m i c h a e l

m i c h a e l wrote:The error Rick pointed out has been fixed and the new video uploaded. Thanks again, Rick!

No, the thanks is due to you. I'm still floored by the video and have shown it to my programmer friends who like it very much also. Thanks!

Great video m i c h a e l !

Just watched it

Thanks!

Hi Nick!

I'm so glad you liked the video. I've been doing some more work with FOOP over the past month, and I'm pleased with the progress so far. I'm using it to write simulations (ballpoint pen, toaster, blender), which really put an object language to the test. Mostly I'm looking for a way to elegantly add object references to FOOP that will complement FOOP's simplicity.

Good to hear from you again!

m i c h a e l