Our objects are actually much closer to functional records than to conventional objects. I'd recommend reading our most recent paper. Hold your knee jerkin' for another language!

I took a look at the papers and examples before i posted my troll comment.

Its nice that the syntax is simpler than in C-based languages, but its still OOP and you motivate people to think in OOP ways. I had some bad experiences with OOP. Most prominent is, that i spend more time with assorting functions and classes than with writing stuff and that i often lost view for the important implementation details. Your language is good for functional and OOP programming, but like Scala, its maybe not a good idea to give the developer a choice.