Re: Interesting take on Paradigms (OO vs Procedural)

"Charles Hottel" <chottel@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:AtCdnRqpKKdHQp3VnZ2dnUVZ_gudnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I think you can make a case to prefer "class based programming" to
"object
> oriented programming" but the hard facts of reality are that that ****p
has
> sailed.

As of Thursday, April 10th, when I found these references,
Wikipedia shows 111 object-oriented progamming languages
<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Object-oriented_programming_languages
>
and 36 class-based progamming languages
< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Class-based_programming_languages
>.
I am not sure one can trust these lists because C++ shows
as class-based but not object-oriented.

The latter web page, above, states:
-----
This category lists all object-oriented programming languages
which adhere to the Class-based programming paradigm.
-----

This suggests that those who created this page consider
class-based to be a subset of object-oriented; thus
inheriting the definition of a term ("object") that I find
objectionable.