Terry Reedy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I did not really 'get' OOP until after learning Python. The > relatively simple but powerful user class model made more sense to > me than C++. So introducing someone to Python, where OOP is a > choice, not a mandate, is how *I* would introduce a procedural > programmer to the subject. YMMV.
OOP is a choice in C++ too. You can write procedural C++ code; no need to use classes at all if you don't want to. Something like Java is a different story. Java *forces* you to use classes. Nothing exists in Java that's not part of some class. I think the real reason Python is a better teaching language for teaching OO concepts is because it just gives you the real core of OO: inheritence, encapsulation, and association of functions with the data they act on. C++ has so much stuff layed on top of that (type bondage, access control, function polymorphism, templates) that it's hard to see the forest for the trees. You get C++ jocks who are convinced that that stuff is part and parcel of OO, and if it doesn't have (for example), private data, it can't be OO. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
