Not fully OO ?

[Aaron "Castironpi" Brady]

On Sep 20, 5:14 am, Fredrik Lundh <fred... at pythonware.com> wrote:
> Kay Schluehr wrote:
> > Answer: if you want to define an entity it has to be defined inside a
> > class. If you want to access an entity you have to use the dot
> > operator. Therefore Java is OO but Python is not.
>
> you're satirising the quoted author's cargo-cultish view of object
> orientation, right?
>
> </F>

If you define OO as implementation inheritance, then Java is not.  It
inherits interface only.  Another possibility is, has a virtual
function table.  The fact that Python indexes by name doesn't
disqualify it from that definition.  I don't know if Java meets it.

I don't think raw C structures would be included, and you can define
function pointers in them.

Wikipedia puts it decently: "mainly for OO programming, but with some
procedural elements."

<ducks>