OOP flavours

[Asko Kauppi <asko.kauppi@...>]

But there could be many.

	require "obj_adams"  :)
	require "obj_barebones"
	require "obj_pythonese"

The point being, instead of building a whole system from the ground up 
(and doing all the mistakes) a newcomer could simply pick-and-place the 
one system she wants.  And even, if these packages were centrally 
orchestrated, their API approaches could be at least similar to each 
other.

Some document could then be used to highlight the differences & 
pros/cons of each of them.

-ak


16.1.2005 kello 12:23, Adam D. Moss kirjoitti:

>  Personally I think that self.something() / self.super.something()
> is clearer than 'something' implicitly coming out of the class's
> namespace.  A standardised object mechanism isn't likely to address
> such personal preferences.
>
> --Adam