MonkeeSage wrote: > [...] just because a language doesn't implement OO in the > exact same way as another doesn't mean it isn't OO -- it just means > it's a different language.
I've a suspicion that folk who aren't familiar with the Python object system automatically assume the phrase 'Python types' means C++/Java-style primitives - which it doesn't. Python's type/class distinction may be klunky and inelegant, but it's still OO. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
