Whoa, hold it there... inheritance and subclassing are OOP, types is a different subject, right?
I wish this weren't true. It's quite damning.
It's less bad in a real-time conversation, with fast feedback about how well we're being understood. But it still hints that we don't have the concepts clear in our own minds.
From golang documentation:
"Although Go has types and methods and allows an object-oriented style of programming, there is no type hierarchy. The concept of “interface” in Go provides a different approach that we believe is easy to use and in some ways more general. There are also ways to embed types in other types to provide something analogous—but not identical—to subclassing. Moreover, methods in Go are more general than in C++ or Java: they can be defined for any sort of data, even built-in types such as plain, “unboxed” integers. They are not restricted to structs (classes).
Also, the lack of a type hierarchy makes “objects” in Go feel much more lightweight than in languages such as C++ or Java."