On Jun 17, 7:38 am, Jean-Michel Pichavant <jeanmic...@sequans.com> wrote: > abhishek goswami wrote: > > Hi, > > I have very basic question about Python that do we consider pyhton as > > script language. > > I searched in google but it becomes more confusion for me. After some > > analysis I came to know that Python support oops . > > > Can anyone Guide me that Python is Oject oriented programming language > > or Script language > > > Abhishek Goswami > > Chennai > > Phone No -0996227099 > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > ICC World Twenty20 England '09 exclusively on YAHOO! CRICKET > > <http://in.rd.yahoo.com/tagline_cricket_3/*http://cricket.yahoo.com> > > Depends on what you are calling a scripting language. > Refering to wikipedia, > "A *scripting language*, *script language* or *extension language* is a > programming language <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Programming_language> > that allows some control of a single or many software application(s) > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Application_software>." > > Python is definitely OOP oriented and I don't think it fits in the > script definition above. > Python is interpreted and platform independent, but you can still build > standalone platform dependent binaries if required. > > Regarding your last question, I'm not sure scripting and OOP language > are not compatible, I'm pretty sure you'll be able to find OOP scripting > language. > > Jean-Michel
I'm not the only one that thinks that Java is a joke, though I provoke flaming, and do not know it fluently. It's all big words and handcuffs. To quote my favorite t.v. show, 'You imply disparity where none exists.' You're trying to 'pigeon-hole', where the subjects are fairly complex, even though not ultimately continuous, but still not binary. You might as well be asking whether it's rainy or sunny out. Even day and night only account for 22-23 hours out of our day. Speaking of big words, programming languages vary in a number of dimensions. Regardless of what surface you use to divide the space, you'll have data points which aren't quite intuitively aligned with the rest of their category; not to shirk the burden of proof. The high complexity of Python blurs the partition. You might give it a center, and some membership density function that decreases with the distance from it, like the volume of a loudspeaker. I'm not sure whether you would define these from use data, or something more a priori. The former doesn't require as much contortion. Some have proposed the same tactic for culture division and nation borders, incidentally, as one 'compromization' tactic; that is, to 'fuzzily' classify regions, and languages likewise. It would make Python, say 10% appropriate for scripting, and 90% object-oriented, just as 10% of 'our' police comes from, and 10% of our taxes goes to Sweden. However, you've never heard of a 70% Catholic, and further, the logistics on that formulation don't align quite rightly: it would be more like, 'we' pay takes to Sweden at 10% of the tax rate at its capital and anywhere else that only Sweden influences. Some places of commerce even accept the kroner too. That still might not make you be 70% Catholic, but definitely ten people definitely definitely can. Come to think of it, the percentages don't have to add up to 1, it's more like Python is 50% appropriate for scripting, and object-oriented in the high nineties. I guess I was just trying to be politically correct, impartial, or otherwise unbiased, though consequently rigid in the meantime. Sadly so. Linguists define distinctions between natural languages by measure of mutual interpretability. The two most similar languages out there may be practically the same; the two most different may not have even any syntax in common; and the one most different from the one closest to it may well be Python. Fancy that! In this participant's humble opinion, no. There are better scripting languages out there. In his arrogant opinion, no. It 'sets the curve'. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list