No such thing as a small change | |
PerlMonks |
comment on |
( [id://3333]=superdoc: print w/replies, xml ) | Need Help?? |
When we say a language "is OO", we use that as shorthand for "there is a way of easily accessing polymorphism, abstraction, and inheritance". You are splitting hairs along a non-normal crease to redefine that statement.
Sure, you can do non-OO stuff with an "OO language". Sure, you can do OO stuff with a "non OO language". But your definition doesn't help distinguish the languages which make you fight against the grain for OO. So it's a pretty useless definition for most of us. Fine to do this in the privacy of your own cube, but posting a headline like "Perl is not OO" will get you nailed pretty bad in this community, and does no justice to those who walk away saying "Oh, I heard Perl is not OO, but Java definitely is...". Now you've done us all an injustice. -- Randal L. Schwartz, Perl hacker In reply to Re: Perl is NOT OO
by merlyn
|
|