On Wednesday 03 June 2015 08:33, Marko Rauhamaa wrote: > Grant Edwards <invalid@invalid.invalid>: > >> On 2015-06-02, Ian Kelly <ian.g.ke...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Accepting for the sake of argument that "something to be subclassed" >>> is a reasonable definition of object, >> >> Huh? You can't subclass an object. You can subclass a Class. > > More to the point: you don't need classes for objects -- even in the > deepest OOP sense.
That part is true. > In Python, classes are little more than constructor functions. But that's not. Classes give you an inheritance hierarchy. They also hold shared state, and behaviour for the instances. -- Steve -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
