Davor wrote:
> M.E.Farmer wrote:
>> Wrap your head around Python, don't wrap the Python around your head!
>> This is NOT Java, or C++ or C , it IS Python.
>
> that's interesting hypothesis that behavior will vary due to the use of
> different language - actually most python scripts that I have seen do
> not even use OO which is quite understandable (same with perl, php,..)
> and I'm not even sure why all these languages have incorporated OO at
> all...
Of course, *all* Python programs (whether you call them scripts or
otherwise) are using objects. Strings, numbers, files, lists,
dictionaries ... they're all objects. You *can't* write a Python program
without objects, but you can do so without a single "class" declaration.
The point that M.E.Farmer was trying to make is that you should not judge OO
by Java or C++. Those languages make OO a burden, with on the one hand
excessive requirements to subclass, and on the othe hand ... well, C++ is
just a burden all round really :)
Richard
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
