From: Sammy Larbi <sam@...>
Date: 2007-05-11T07:53:11+09:00
Subject: Re: Defending Ruby's OOP

Gary Wright wrote, On 5/10/2007 2:47 PM:
>
> On May 10, 2007, at 3:26 PM, Lucas Holland wrote:
>
>> How can I defend the claim that Ruby is 100% OOP?
>
> Just redefine the meaning of 100%, that should work.
> If not, redefine the meaning of OOP.
>
> Really, it seems like a silly argument.  Better to
> simply understand what Ruby is or isn't and the same
> for other languages.  I doubt that there is some
> mathematically-true total ordering on programming
> languages relative to OOPness (or any other criteria
> for that matter).


And more importantly, what value would that bring?