From: Lloyd Zusman <ljz@...>
Date: 2001-07-23T10:19:29+09:00
Subject: [ruby-talk:18311] Re: Ruby as opposed to Python?

Albert Wagner <alwagner@tcac.net> writes:

> Hi, Mark.  
> 
> On Sunday 22 July 2001 16:43, you wrote:
>> 
>> [ ... ]
> 
> What attracted me to Ruby from Python was the fact that it was pure
> OOP, not an addon as in Python.  For a language to be fun for me, it
> must be more than just a collection of addon features.  Ruby has a
> design integrity that I found lacking in Python.  I don't find the
> differences between a pure OOP language and a hybrid language to be
> "insignificant" nor a "minor difference."

I'm virtually certain that Guido designed Python to be O-O from day
one, and so I wouldn't call it a "hybrid" at all.  Perhaps you're
thinking of Perl, whose OOP capabilities are indeed add-ons (and
rather hack-ish, IMNSHO).

But the flavor of Ruby is indeed different from that of Python.
Ruby's structure seems similar in many ways to that of Smalltalk,
which many people consider to be a "model", since it's one of the
early O-O languages that became popular.  Python's O-O "feel" is
indeed different from that of Smalltalk and of Ruby.


> [ ... ]

-- 
 Lloyd Zusman
 ljz@asfast.com