[Twisted-Python] Python a post-Object Oriented Language?

Robert Church rc at pgdn.org
Wed Nov 19 16:07:30 EST 2003

On Wed, Nov 19, 2003 at 12:45:26PM -0800, John Benson quipped:

> Given that background, I'm just curious to hear the grounds on which
> Python can be classified as post-OOP. Any comments?

Fortunately or unfortunately, there's no single, one, common
definition for OOP. There is wide disparity in featuresets among
languages which are commonly held to be object-oriented.

Jonathan Rees gives us a nice catalog of some of the features
typically associated with OO here:


In what respect is Python "post-OO"? Well, you could say that a
language which combines OO features with nice first class functions
and list comprehensions, while eliminating some of the Java cruft, is
"post-OO". But you could say the same for CLOS, or Self, which are 20
and 15 years old respectively, predating the widespread adoption of OO
by a good many years. So, maybe Python is "pre-OO"?

Here's an article in American Scientist alledging the existence of a
post-OO paradigm, including XP, aspects, and design patterns:


More information about the Twisted-Python mailing list