Phrogz wrote:
> If you consider classes, and especially class inheritance, to be an
> important part of OO, then you're in for a surprise. Not only does the
> language not support it well, but even with some dirty hacks[1] there
> are still serious limitations[2] when it comes to more than one level
> of inheritance.

Problem of approach? Trying to grok Javascript OO if you consider 
classes to be essential is a recipe to disaster. JS being 
prototype-based (also called classless.)

That said, I'm not really an expert on prototype-based OO, and how it's 
to be used correctly. The fact it's mildly esoterical, with the only 
other implementations that come to mind being Self (now deader than a 
very dead thing, and PPC / Sparc only) and IO (so undocumented it's not 
even funny anymore) doesn't help either, and so it's understandable that 
people want classes to work instead on delving into the arcana of a 
non-mainstream OO paradigm.

David Vallner