Could someone give hints/pointers that help me understand the following? "parsing non-command messages in each process ... not a strong attempt to intertwine a real language around the message structures (this very same thing happened with http"
Does that mean the messages should have been part of a coherent protocol or spec? That there should have been some thought behind how messages compose into new messages?
Smalltalk was an early attempt at non-command-messages to objects with the realization that you get a "programming language" if you take some care with the conventions used for composing the messages.
Does that mean the messages should have been part of a coherent protocol or spec? That there should have been some thought behind how messages compose into new messages?