Why Java Is Not A Pure Object Oriented Language?

[Abhishek Dhar]

Hello friends can anybody help me t explain why java is not a pure object oriented language. I know about one of the main reasons behind it but ar there some other reasons too


Java's primitive types are not objects. Primitive types store their values in the stack rather than being references to values. This was a conscious decision by Java's designers for performance reasons. Because of this, Java is not considered to be a pure object-oriented programming language. However, as of Java 5.0, autoboxing enables programmers to write as if primitive types are their wrapper classes, and freely interchange between them for improved flexibility.


If there ar other reasons then just explain them in detail

[Ulf Dittmer]

This question has been discussed many, many times. Please search the forums to find those. Be aware that the question only makes sense if you have a definition of what a "pure OO language" is.
[ March 29, 2007: Message edited by: Ulf Dittmer ]

[fred rosenberger]

Be aware that the question only makes sense if you have a definition of what a "pure OO language" is.

And if everyone agrees on that definition, which they generally don't.

[marc weber]

Originally posted by Ulf Dittmer:
This question has been discussed many, many times...

More than that, I think.