On top of that, you seem dedicated to the argument that Objective-C is a bad language, and that Objective-J is silly for wanting to re-implement it. Of course, as mentioned in the post, that was in no way the goal of Objective-J. The actual language isn't the point.

Separately, Objective-C is a great language, and plenty of people love it. More every day thanks to the iPhone. Can you give me three reasons why you don't like it?

Finally, claiming OO programming is dead is nonsensical. Java is by far the world's most popular programming language. Right below it you'll find C++ and C#. Three strictly OO languages. Not to mention the fact that two of the three most popular JavaScript libraries build in classical inheritance.

so much so that its almost impossible to find it being put to use outside of places apple forces it. and before you say "gnustep"...no one uses that

Can you give me three reasons why you don't like it?

1. goofy/eyes-bleed syntax

2. i don't care about OO

3. i'll think of something later

Finally, claiming OO programming is dead is nonsensical. Java is by far the world's most popular programming language.

java is a ployglot language. they're busy now trying to turn it into a hybrid-functional language...just like c#, the other kitchen-sink language

and c++ was designed from the ground-up to be multi-paradigm, this is all over everything stroustrup says about it

This is almost always an indication that a programming language critic has nothing really thoughtful to say. Same with Lisp and S-expressions.

If I may paraphrase: "It's slightly different than what I'm used to, therefor I despise it."

"impossible to find it being put to use outside of places apple forces it."

That's a huge caveat. iPhone development is extremely popular. Maybe the point is that people just put up with Objective C in order to do iPhone/Mac development. But I don't think that is true. NextStep had a small but rabidly devoted following, and part of that was because they really liked Objective C. Apple tried Java bindings to Cocoa at one point, but found everyone used Objective C anyways.

In general, I think it's true that most developers don't know much about ObjC until they want to develop for iPhone/Mac. But once they learn it, they tend to like it, from what I can tell.

oh come on, it is well known that apple intentionally dragged their feet on their java support for years

probably because they realized that as gross as java was, very few people would bother with objective c if they could get first-class support for java on cocoa

Apple (or more, exactly, the part from NeXT) did initially bet a lot on Java adoption. They ported the entire WebObjects stack from ObjC to Java, only to watch the technology get abandoned by those in the banking and eCommerce communities. The conversion was so total that when the Cocoa-To-Java bridge in OS X was deprecated, it was no longer possible to continue using the original WO tool chain. (What WO development outside of Apple exists made a new chain based on Eclipse, from what I read.)

It works surprisingly well, but you can't and won't believe it until you try it yourself.

i didn't mention lisp or s-expressions. of course taste is subjective, but the "objective c is fugly" meme has lots of adherents

As it happens, the javascript language is incredibly flexible and expressive. Maybe we in the js community should man up and accept that there are many ways to skin the DOM cat. They may look rather different from one another, but they're all javascript.

to be honest, i see the basis of objective-j born from some notion that apple does things right so naturally we all want to do things they way they do...but objective c sucks (having coded in it), and i have no idea why people would want to muck up another stack by pasting objective c onto it

The word "apple" DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE ARTICLE. (I just checked.) Please, read the article and reply to the very thoughtful points made there. Ascribing some vague, unsubstantiated motives to people who have carefully laid out their entire reasoning behind their decision does not reflect well on your ability to engage in substantive discussion.