Is classless worth consideration

[Peter Hansen]

Hung Jung Lu wrote:

> I have also pointed out previously that
> Python uses 5 devices where prototype-based needs only one: (a) class,
> (b) instance, (c) module, (d) metaclass, (e) scope. If this is not
> hideously baroque, then, Houston, we've got a problem. If you can
> really think outside the box, you'd pitch in also: (f) aspect.

Well, (c) module is merely a packaging technique, not anything
to do specifically with OOP, so it shouldn't appear in a list
of "what do you think makes Python's OO model hideously baroque".

As for class and instance, unless all other languages that
have class and instance are also considered baroque, it
hardly seems fair to separate them.

Scope doesn't quite seem to fit in this either, but not
being a theoretician I'll just leave the discussion at
this point and point out that for the purposes of a *large*
majority of the people using Python, these issues do not
arise and Python OO is very much a breath of fresh air
compared to anything else they've used.  Which still makes
it hard for me to see a claim of "hideous baroqueness" as
anything other than deliberately inflammatory, but wrong.

-Peter