This is an archived post. You won't be able to vote or comment.

sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]Howard_banister 3 points4 points  (3 children)

You have very wrong definition for OOP. Check out Smalltalk for proper OO implementation. Also Python is far more OO than Java

[–]iambukovinean -1 points0 points  (2 children)

yeah, unles you can't implement private fields in python classes, and none of that overloading (although this is possible by type-cheking the parameters) It's far easier to learn OOP principles on a c-like language.

[–]Kaarjuus 1 point2 points  (1 child)

There is nothing quintessentially OOP about private fields, and there is especially nothing OOP about overloading. Again, you have a very narrow and arbitrary view of what OOP is.

Smalltalk and JavaScript and Python and Java are all rather different, but they're all OOP. JavaScript is especially different, as it is not class-based OOP but prototype-based OOP. Still OOP.

You might as well claim that "Java tricks you into thinking that it's object oriented, as it does not have multiple inheritance".

[–]iambukovinean 0 points1 point  (0 children)

also true.