On Mon, Oct 27, 2008 at 12:02 PM, Anthony Ziebell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Luke, > > Discrediting c++ has nothing to do with the question "Is JavaScript > object-orientated?". With that, and in closing, I would like to point out > that my comments were based on the actual question - asking if JavaScript > were object-oriented, not if it has objects. Prototype has objects, and it > is of my opinion that JavaScript is more prototype than anything else. > > Thanks, > Anthony.
Yes that's fine anthony, but the problem is that statement doesn't actually mean anything. it is logically invalid, and quite nonsensical to say "javascript is not object oriented, it's more prototype based", because the two things are not mutually exclusive. Javascript having prototypical inheritence has absolutely nothing to do with the question of whether it is object oriented or not. It can be both object oriented, AND based on prototypal inheritence, and in fact, it is both. 100%. This is not my opinion. it is a fact. ******************************************************************* List Guidelines: http://webstandardsgroup.org/mail/guidelines.cfm Unsubscribe: http://webstandardsgroup.org/join/unsubscribe.cfm Help: [EMAIL PROTECTED] *******************************************************************
