From: Mark Nenadov Date: 2001-07-23T11:44:18+09:00 Subject: [ruby-talk:18315] Re: Ruby as opposed to Python? In article , "Albert Wagner" 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 know I already replied to your last message, but I have one more question... What do you consider a pure OOP language to be? I think no language is pure OOP.. I think actually every implementation on earth of OOP is not "pure" persay. Its simply a matter of who has the best OOP support, I really doubt pure OOP really exists. Nevertheless, Python WAS built with OOP in mind - though it isn't pure "persay" just like every other language on the face of the earth including Ruby (Perl wasn't built with OOP in mind, but thats a whole 'nother story, and I am by no means advocating Perl). -- ~Mark Nenadov (author/editor for http://www.coffeecode.com)