I would like the opinion of the community on this. I have discussed the addition of an introduction to OOP back when I was very actively contributing to UPBE and the response I got was very positive. The plan was similar to what I mentioned, just bare basics , making sure that the reader understand the very basic fundamental concepts�� of OO, like classes, inheritance, instances, class and instance variables, class and instance methods etc. Essentially a chapter similar to my video tutorials but going a bit deepers with more detailed example still keeping it simple , clear and understandable even for non coders.
I want to know whether such chapter would be included because I dont like to waste my time or the precious time of the student that has taken the task on her shoulders.
"
IMHO this is the exception to that obvious
rule. OOP in particular is misunderstood by almost everyone. If we as
Smalltalkers describe it from a forensic CS perspective that sounds to
me like C++, I believe it is better that we say nothing on the subject."
Personally I dont care if people misunderstand OOP , I only care about getting my code to work the way I want it. So far I had no problem doing that even though I code using very simple concept some of them may come even back when I was coding in C++. I also dont share the sense of wonder that some of you may share about how Smalltalk is doing OO, coming from python does not seem such a big deal for me.