On Feb 2, 2:46 pm, Tim Rowe <digi...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2009/2/2 Russ P. <russ.paie...@gmail.com>: > > > Are we supposed > > to believe that the designers of C++, Java, Ada, and Scala are all > > idiots? > > No, we're supposed to believe that the designers of C++, Java, Ada, > and Scala are all designers of languages that are not Python. If all > languages had the same philosophy what would be the point of different > languages? Is it worth mentioning (again) that Python is not Java? > > -- > Tim Rowe
I am not sure why people keep "mentioning" that "Python is not Java." As a slogan, it is rather misleading. Python is not C++, Ada, or Scala either. All of those languages have enforced access restriction. Why only mention Java? For the record, I have never used Java, nor do I have any desire to ever use it. That is why I am intrigued by the apparent obsession with it here. I suspect that many programmers are forced to use against their wishes. If that's the case, you have my sympathies, but let's not pretend that Java is the only popular OO language with enforced access restrictions. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
