3 ms·
You would have to ask the authors of those languages but I do not find it very surprising. If you take the whole set of features that commonly comprises object-
by cjfd 7y ago
You would have to ask the authors of those languages but I do not find it very surprising. If you take the whole set of features that commonly comprises object-orientedness it is a rather large set that also seems a bit arbitrary. Why would the same language construct known as a class support inheritance and static members and data hiding? Those are orthogonal things. It seems as such more logical to provide these and other features but not necessarily as a package deal.
- Buttons840 7y agoGood point, I've never thought of it that way before. You've heard of the "God-class" anti-patern. Java style classes are a "God-abstraction".