On 30 Okt, 15:09, Steven D'Aprano <[EMAIL PROTECTED] cybersource.com.au> wrote: >
[Language "OOness", hand-waving] > I disagree. I think they *do* take away from the overall Object-Oriented > nature of the language, and that is A Very Good Thing Indeed. But everything is an object in Python: nothing has been taken away. ;-) Anyway, I don't sympathise with the "methods for everything" mentality, either, but there's a reason for Java doing things this way - for Python, in fact, you actually get something extra over and above Java's implementation of object-orientation. [...] > http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom-of-nouns... As always, a pinch of salt is required when reading the works of certain commentators (or skimming them, for those making slightly better use of their time). Some choice words sum up the attitude we see in works like this: http://steve-yegge.blogspot.com/2006/03/execution-in-kingdom-of-nouns.html#c114516329036008490 Thankfully, various decisions in the design of Python and its built-in types and functions let us leave such squabbles to eat up the time of the Ruby and Java fanboys. Paul -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
