How do you define "object-oriented"?
Kevin G. Fisher
kgf at golden.net
Sun Apr 28 00:47:47 UTC 2002
On Sat, Apr 27, 2002 at 09:24:47AM +0200, Cees de Groot wrote:
> Of course, Python is a flexible enough language that you can write your own
> base class library, forget at the whole mess with built-in functions and types
> (except at places in the base class library - compare 'print' with a
> <primitive: print> in Smalltalk if you wish), and have all objects all the
> time. I've been toying over and over with this idea, but never bothered to do
> it (actually it would probably a one or two day job to have the basic numeric
> and collection types in there).
Someone pointed me towards Ruby...I only had a chance to take a quick glance
at it, but boy...it looked an awful lot like Python, only with the
Smalltalk "everything is an object" philosophy.
I was only looking into Python because we're planning on using it at work
for a variety of scripting purposes; I've suggested Squeak a number of
times and I get that odd look when I tell them it's Smalltalk...
(Something like "Smalltalk? Wow, it's been a long time since I've heard
of that...you program Smalltalk?")
Oh well I'm content for the moment to have subtly introduced Squeak at two
seperate workplaces in the form of SWiki's. :)
> Cees de Groot http://www.cdegroot.com <cg at cdegroot.com>
> GnuPG 1024D/E0989E8B 0016 F679 F38D 5946 4ECD 1986 F303 937F E098 9E8B
More information about the Squeak-dev