Add alias Obj for Object

[themoriarti]

Description:
Currently, we use Object in the codebase, but it is too verbose in some cases.
Would be to add a shorter alias Obj that points to Object for cleaner and more concise code.

Acceptance Criteria:

Obj can be used everywhere instead of Object.

Both Object and Obj should be interchangeable.

Update documentation/examples to include the new alias.

[sashml]

Hey @zombocoder — thoughtful proposal, and worth discussing carefully before adding it.

The case against Obj as an alias

O²L is deliberately consistent in using full English words for its keywords and type names: Object, Text, Int, Bool, List, Map, Set, Record. There's no abbreviated keyword anywhere in the language today. Obj would be the first abbreviation — and once the door is open, the natural next requests are Txt, Lst, Rec, etc. That path leads to a split vocabulary where both the short and long forms must be documented, taught, and kept in sync forever.

Verbosity is intentional here

The Object keyword appears at the top level of a class declaration — a place where you write it once per file, not repeatedly inside method bodies. The ergonomic cost is nearly zero. Compare: Object Foo { ... } vs Obj Foo { ... } — saving three characters in a declaration that spans 50+ lines is not a meaningful DX win.

Aliases increase maintenance surface

Two names for the same concept means two things to keep aligned in error messages, tooling, IDE completions, docs, and parser edge-cases. Any future rename or extension of Object semantics has to track both. The zero ongoing cost of a single canonical name is real.

What might actually help

If the motivation is that Object feels heavy in certain contexts, it might be worth looking at whether there are specific patterns where a different language construct (e.g. a protocol, an anonymous record, or structural typing) fits better than Object. Happy to explore that direction if there are concrete use cases driving this.

cc: @zombocoder — open to pushback if there are ergonomic scenarios I'm not considering!