IsPython really O-O?

[Peter Hansen]

kentsmith at dxsys.com wrote:
> 
> A Smalltalk guru in our organization looked at Python last weekend (after I
> had made a big scene saying that it may be a solution to some of our
> cross-platform issues) and came away saying that it was no more
> object-oriented than Java.  I sputtered around a bit but could hardly make a
> decent argument, as I'm a mere designer.  We do very large-scale industrial
> work here, all O-O, with object databases (I thought the ZODB business
> looked great).  Is my friend right?  Is Python not "really" appropriate for
> true O-O applications, in the sense that Viz-Age Smalltalk and Eifel and so
> on are???

What is it about "true O-O" applications (never heard the term)
which requires the features of Smalltalk and Eiffel?

More likely, depending on what you mean by "large-scale industrial
work" (also a term I've never heard except when applied to heavy
machinery) you will find Python slower than Smalltalk, and unacceptable
to your anti-non-Smalltalk people...

(I use Python for industrial work, use ZODB, and write what I 
thought, until now, were "true O-O" applications, and I've been
very happy with it until now.  Maybe I should stop? ;-)

> Kent Smith
> <embarrassed and kicking himself in Toronto>

I'd be embarrassed to be living in Toronto too.  No, wait!  I *am*
living in Toronto! :)

Strange home page you people have...

-- 
----------------------
Peter Hansen, P.Eng.
peter at engcorp.com