Or as Gilad Bracha summarized (in reference to Cook's article): "The notion of an interface is what truly characterizes objects - not classes, not inheritance, not mutable state."<p><a href="https://gbracha.blogspot.com/2022/06/the-prospect-of-execution-hidden.html" rel="nofollow">https://gbracha.blogspot.com/2022/06/the-prospect-of-executi...</a><p>(the "not mutable state" bit is what makes a function an object for me but that's an ancient debate: <a href="http://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/msg03277.html" rel="nofollow">http://people.csail.mit.edu/gregs/ll1-discuss-archive-html/m...</a>)
God, this is again one of those CS papers that is written as if it's trying to be as inscrutable as possible.<p>Can't the author lead in by giving a simple example of both abstract data types and objects (as he understands the terms), in a well-known programming language?