# Re: I'll have the duck!

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-ill-have-the-duck/101097>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [August 3, 2006, 12:43pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-ill-have-the-duck/101097 "2006-08-03T12:43:41Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![unknown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/u/4bbf92/32.png) [@unknown](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/unknown)\
**Post date:** [August 3, 2006, 12:43pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/re-ill-have-the-duck/101097/1 "2006-08-03T12:43:41Z")

</div>

> > there’s a language called “self” that has no classes, only prototypes. if  
> > you
> 
> > can find some material on that, i think you’ll find it interesting.

Just chiming in here, early ActionScript (v1.0) also had a totally  
protoype-based object system. 2.0 brought in classes but I think  
retained some of the prototyping capabilities. 3.0 has probably gone  
all classes, they’re trying to make it into a so-called “real” OO  
language… which I think has its good and bad points.