Randal,
On Monday 13 August 2001 14:10, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> Troy> I'm not sure I would call Perl a mixture of many languages, though it
> has Troy> adopted features from other languages. And calling Perl an
> OOP-based Troy> language might be overstating it, though I do like Perl's
> OOP features, Troy> such as I know them.
>
> It's about as OO as C++ or Java. What do you call C++ and Java?
What do I call C++ and Java? I'd call them programming languages designed to
be used in an OO fashion. Is Perl that? I don't know Damian Conway or Larry
Wall personally, as you do - do they consider Perl a language designed to be
used in an OO fashion? What I see is an elegant and extremely flexible
language that allows you to work in an OO fashion if you choose.
As you know OO is as much a state of mind as a feature of a language. You
can do non-OO programming in each of these languages.
Java is designed to be used in the OO mindset from the ground up - not
required but highly suggested. C++ is much the same; without the OO features
you're just writing fancy C.
In any event, I'm not too worried about drawing comparisons between Perl and
C++ or Java, and I don't think the original poster was specifically trying to
do so either.
Regards,
Troy
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
