[David M Cook]:
> I would call it *pragmatically* implemented OOP. It's not> "proper" as some would see it.
> As I understand it, there are a number of issues.> 1. Lack of method polymorphism> 2. Use of built-in functions instead of "proper" methods.> 3. ability to declare functions and variables at the> module level.
Ad 2 and 3... well, practicality/pragmatism beats purity, once again.
Right now I'm struggling with the stupidity of Java (whether it's got
properly implemented OOP is another issue) in order to get certified
(since doing Python for a living is as yet a severely limited option
for me, despite evangelism). Guess I'm just spoiled.
Ad 1... I've yet to get involved in projects big/complicated enough
where I could conceivably benefit from that, so I don't miss it.