In message <1729121287c950a23813c5596b4b3f57 / ruby-forum.com>, Lucas Holland writes:
>I've got someone here saying that Ruby (and other languages) can't be
>100% object-oriented because if and unless and so on (keywords) are no
>objects.
>
>How can I defend the claim that Ruby is 100% OOP?

Argue with smarter people.

-s