Can you actually justify why inheritance is needed in GEdit?
Show me a problem that needs solving then I can see if it needs inheritance.
"I said something about OO being a strong tool for game programming"
But we aren't "game programming"--most of the gritty stuff is already done. We are scripting an engine running in an already written game.
Be careful you might have given people the impression that you think OO is better for the "gritty stuff" which I'm fairly certain is not your opinion.
But in response, what you said would make even more sense if you were only scripting things for campaigns in a sc2 gameplay situation. But we saw from the videos that this map editing tool is capable of so much more(So was war3). I found vJass to be very helpful making a game that was like a table top strategy game(Similar to Warhammer the table top game, but with war3 races). In a game like that I mostly didn't use much of what would be considered the game and instead I used war3 mostly as a (Graphics, Input, Sound, Network) engine and reprogrammed all of the game code myself. In which case I found OO to be the best paradigm to solve the problem mostly to do because of the advantages of inheritance. Due to the fact that I had many objects which were base objects of something else. Weapons and Spells(Polymorphic relation in this case, if memory serves) were both capable of being used as an action. Swords and Bows both used code for attacking.
And for user input such as ending a turn or choosing units. I used functional scripts, because they fit that situation better. That's what was great about vJass, it had both.
Or they also showed a demo that opens up the possibilities of a Third person shooter(and I'm sure FPS), this would do a similar thing to SC2 as the above, it would use it as a (Graphics, Input, Sound, Network, Physics) engine. I could see a better argument for functional programming here than above, but there are elements that could still be best represented as objects especially if the game wasn't traditional to it's approach of the FPS or 3PS.
So yes you can solve all the mentioned problems in functional programming, but I believe the OO paradigm is set best for those problems. But also I mentioned I had scripts in my game for the actions, because scripts fit best there. I would like to see something similar, I would like to see a mixed functional and OO language. Because then it fits more types of problems, with small to possibly no disadvantages.
--------------------------------
Now that I think about it, why isn't there an open source project for this? Maybe that's what we should be doing instead of a petition, historically petitions have accomplished very little(more accurately historically a mockery of the internet and the causes they stand for). Not to mention I'm not a big fan of working on Blizzard time pretending that they will do anything about an online petition(You're joking yourself if you think they didn't know what arguments you were going to put forth years before releasing the game, they are programming in an OO language and they know what OO is good for).
So what do you you all say? Community project? I've been planning on making galaxy for XText(Tool for adding languages easily to the eclipse IDE, including code assist!(Very useful)). Personally that's the first thing I would like to see is a good environment to code in. And from there we can create a compiler, of which would eventually include OO compilation.
*Edit* I went to check the original petition to check and make sure I wasn't blowing too much smoke by misunderstanding what the petition was in the first place, but I could get it to load, so if I am I'm sorry*Edit*
*PS I know not every one of the problems was OO and namespaces but I think I remember them being there in the petition, so this is hopefully part of a solution to that problem