Figure and Ground: N-Dimensioned Programming Language or a Paradigm Oriented Programming Language
Looking at paintings, they are often composed of a figure and a ground. The figure is usually what is more visible for the eye. Often the ground is less important as recognizing the shape is thought to be satisfied by recognizing the figure.
Understanding the figure can be simpler due to its more concrete and explicit nature, but the vision can not be complete without the ground. I even guess that thinking about the ground as a result of drawing the figure is quite naive. I guess that the ground defines rules of the environment, and is present implicitly in the definition of the shape. The fact that these rules are implicit makes them harder to capture. And easily ignored.
If we think about Object Oriented Programming as a figure, then what is the ground? The ground should be the environment that allowed us to define this meta-System.
Thinking about OOP as a meta system, allows us to capture the meta-meta-system. How this meta-meta-system can be defined?
Well, If we look at objects, they are special things that fall in a category ,things that fall in this category have special kind of relationship called inheritance, this relationship is governed by rules of polymorphism. Also we can add adjectives to tag some special behavior on the methods and properties of these things.
So far, I got things that fall in a category, governed by rules applied to relationships . moreover methods and properties of these things can have adjectives that can add rules on their use.
Now, with such a meta-meta-system I can define another meta-system than OOP, say a hierarchical one, or maybe a system of connectors. These several meta-systems can co-exist exactly as several categories of things co-exist in real world.
A question that raises evidently here, is How do they co-exist? How do they inter-connect? The simple answer is : messages… The problem of the integration of different types of paradigm had always existed, and had always been pushed out to frameworks to handle it. I believe that these frameworks of integration are themselves not well integrated in the language. Maybe including them in the language can make more natural?
Anyway my whole idea is a paradigm oriented programming language, where we define dimensions, that we can use to define meta-systems. I see the idea is pretty faisable, might be more than a (things, category, relationship, rules, adjectives) even if I could imagine a lot of meta-systems built only on this 5 dimensioned programming language…
All what I am about in this blog post is ideas, far from being mature.It is just a stream of ideas that I felt to persist somewhere. And here I did 
