Overall I feel that the paper is good and accurate...
There is one thing that annoyed me though (having used both Python and Ruby extensively):
"Ruby and Python are really quite similar. For example,
Both are strong object-oriented languages."
That is NOT True. OO was probably not part of Python's design from the start. It feels really tacked on when you have to call 'self' everywhere, and try doing inheritance past a parent (to grandparents and so on...); that's when it becomes really obvious that OO was an afterthought in Python, though this may change with Python 3000 (haven't seen it yet)
For the record I still feel that Python is a good language (for my C friends), it's just not for me - or for most people i know that like OO
There is one thing that annoyed me though (having used both Python and Ruby extensively):
"Ruby and Python are really quite similar. For example, Both are strong object-oriented languages."
That is NOT True. OO was probably not part of Python's design from the start. It feels really tacked on when you have to call 'self' everywhere, and try doing inheritance past a parent (to grandparents and so on...); that's when it becomes really obvious that OO was an afterthought in Python, though this may change with Python 3000 (haven't seen it yet)
For the record I still feel that Python is a good language (for my C friends), it's just not for me - or for most people i know that like OO