3 ms·
Probably because they were in fact "bolted on". Saying that Java is OO from head to toes, I can't agree with. Java has primitive types as well, and not everythi
by objectified 14y ago
Probably because they were in fact "bolted on". Saying that Java is OO from head to toes, I can't agree with. Java has primitive types as well, and not everything is a first class object (like methods). Python is more OO in that sense, for example. In a sense, Java is having trouble incorporating modern features in the language too. Just take a look at how generics are implemented, and the endless closure debate.
- cies 14y agoPython? Try to subclass an int in Python, and see that it is not as OO as you think. Ruby is more OO then Java for the reason you give, still there are primitives but they have a thick OO-coating so you are less likely to notice they are 'different'. Try subclassing a Fixnum -- it works! But Fixnums have no 'new'.