Subject-oriented programming?

The defining feature of object-oriented programming is that objects define their own behaviour: an object may have internal state, but it does have methods. Not everything in object-oriented programming has to be an object: for example, in Java, you can also have primitives like ints which don’t have any methods.

So, in a given Java expression:


We know that a must, by necessity, be an object, whereas b may or may not be.

Which is interesting, because from a grammatical point of view, a isn’t the object: b is. a is the subject of the expression: the thing which does the doing of a thing, possibly to a thing. Subject (a), verb (someMethod), object (b). That’s how I was taught it in grammar school.

So, maybe, given objects only demonstrate objecty behaviour when they’re the subject of an expression, we’ve got our naming all wrong?

One thought on “Subject-oriented programming?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s