[ZevsVultAveHera]

> Concerning the generally accepted meaning of OOP

There is no such thing as "generally accepted meaning of OOP". If there was we would not have every online debate about why OOP sucks turning into "OOP is code structured in a way I proclaim to be OOP and that proves my point that OOP haters are wrong" by "OOP junkies".

[Rochus]

> There is no such thing as "generally accepted meaning of OOP".

Only if you reject the idea that science in particular and humanity in general can produce something like "generally accepted facts." I think that I'm in good company when I consider the IEEE (Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers) with its more than 400k members in over 160 countries a reliable source for the accepted state of the art. The fact that there are always people who doubt the accepted state of the art and prefer to present their own assumptions as truth does little to change this.