OO misconceptions

Tim Hammerquist tim at vegeta.ath.cx
Tue Jul 17 01:54:59 EDT 2001

Me parece que Peter Hansen <peter at engcorp.com> dijo:
> (Actually, when I started posting the other message, my intention
> was to admit that I had hardly even tried to learn and apply Perl.  

Fair enough. Maybe it's just a psychotic (masochistic) tendency to learn
any language that enough people say good things about.  Because of this,
I'm currently familiarizing myself with Smalltalk.  And while it is, as
it claims, a pure OO language, it is exceedingly tedious to do simple
things...things which Perl does in one line and which Python does in 3
now take 10-20+ in Smalltalk.  OO may be powerful, but considering this
particular alternative [Smalltalk] I have to agree with Mr. Prescod's
synopsis that I so violently argued against just yesterday.  =)

> I consider myself fortunate to have discovered Python just when 
> I was considering Perl for an application which required a 
> scripting language.  Perl, in this case (factory automation) would 
> definitely *not* have been a better choice, even in your estimation.  
> I've used a wide enough variety of languages, however, to know that 
> it just wouldn't work for me.  I _do_ have an open mind about it, 
> but that doesn't stop me proselytizing about Python. :-)

Fair enough.  =)   Python does sound like a good choice in this case,
despite Perl's strength in sockets.

Little one, I would like to see anyone -- prophet, king or
god -- persuade a thousand cats to do anything at the same time.
    -- Orange Cat, The Sandman

More information about the Python-list mailing list