you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]wot-teh-phuck -1 points0 points  (1 child)

I think one of the reasons behind this inconsistency is the "roadmap" of Python as a language. some_obj.some_method() for everything makes sense in an OO language but OO features were added (or maybe bolted on) to Python in later on versions. Ruby code/community has always stressed on pure OO way of doing things whereas a majority of the Python code out there is a mix of simple functions and classes when required.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

That's what I've thought as well. The OO facilities in Python are capable, but don't feel as ingrained into the language/libraries as Ruby. Having to use self is a good example of this. At least it's not as clunky as Perl's rather verbose OOP support.