In article <mailman.2300.1277754755.32709.python-l...@python.org>, Michael Torrie <torr...@gmail.com> wrote: >On 06/27/2010 11:58 PM, Stephen Hansen wrote: >> >> To say you can't really know "much about" OOP without knowing "much >> about" Smalltalk seems basically, well, wrong. > >True. But you can't really criticize a language's implementation of OOP >without a good understanding of the "pure" OO language. For example, in >Smalltalk If/Then statements are actually methods of Boolean objects. >>From a certain point of view that's extremely appealing (consistent, >anyway). Almost functional in nature. They are not implemented this >way in Python, so that's one thing you could argue is not OO about Python.
Python is in no way a pure OOP language. (I assume you're aware of this, but your phrasing leaves that in doubt.) -- Aahz (a...@pythoncraft.com) <*> http://www.pythoncraft.com/ "If you don't know what your program is supposed to do, you'd better not start writing it." --Dijkstra -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
