Sorry to be repetitive, but at this point in Julia’s lifecycle, it may take a lot more than generic statements like this for most people to even consider the possibility of taking this seriously.
Likewise, apologies if I sound repetitive, my point is that this is how languages evolved. C++ has the commitment to evolve rapidly post C++11 (not much was done between 98 and 11). Python 2 and Python 3 is another example. They look back and reconsider, the result is that those two languages dominate in many industries as their complexity allows for solving complex problems. They built large communities around.
You can’t “just add” C+±style OOP to Julia:
Also, it is unclear that having some form of OOP would make more people contribute to Julia.
Of course, I am not “demanding” OO to be available in the next release. I am just suggesting that perhaps the discussion is worth having and get different perspectives to answer those questions as many frameworks in scientific computing (hence their communities around) are familiar with OO and they see it as the proper way of doing things (even if some don’t, goes both ways). Perhaps Julia Con or surveys are a better place than discourse.
most Julia users are perfectly happy with this part of the language and would prefer to focus on other things.
I guess it largely depends on the long term vision for Julia on either keeping current users perfectly happy or expand the base. Again, it is open to discussion.
In any case, I think Julia has a lot of great ideas put in practice I’d be happy to see the language grow. Part of it is taking feedback and being cool about it.