Ruby -- A better OO Perl than Perl? Python 3000 features available now?

[david_ullrich at my-deja.com]

In article <Wbr%4.69$vh.19893 at news>,
  "OPUS" <rhicks at nospam.rma.edu> wrote:
>
> "Conrad Schneiker" <schneiker at jump.net> wrote in message
> news:8hl866$bt5$1 at news.jump.net...
>
> :     Ruby is a relatively new, very high level, fully OO language
that
> :     integrated many good ideas from Perl, Python, Smalltalk, Eiffel,
> :     ADA, Clu, and Lisp. (Ruby is more fully OO than Python.)
>
> I thought everything in Python was an object and that Python was
designed
> from the ground up to be object oriented...how can you be more "fully"
OO?

    I don't know anything about Ruby, but a language could certainly
be more fully OO than Python. For example in Python although everything
is an object not every type is a class (you can't subclass list, for
example).

> And stop trolling this newgroup for Ruby converts! If someone wants to
learn
> it they will.

    Not if they never hear about it. I thought he went out of his
way to be polite, to make it clear that he wasn't saying Python
bad Ruby good. Sounds to me like something that might be of
interest to a lot of Python people.
    Maybe it doesn't matter to people who are somehow instantaneously
informed of everything, but the rest of us appreciate a little bit
of marginally on-topic information. (I first heard about Delphi when
I was lurking in a VB group trying to figure out whether it was more
awful or less awful than the BASIC I was using at the time...)


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.