[Greg Stein]
... In other words, I definitely would support a new class object behavior that allows us to update a class' set of bases and dictionary on the fly. This could then be used to support my solution for the recursive type scenario (which, in turn, means that we don't have to introduce Yet Another Namespace into Python to hold type names).
Parenthetically, I never grasped the appeal of the parenthetical comment. Yet Another Namespace for Yet Another Entirely New Purpose seems highly *desirable* to me! Trying to overload the current namespace set makes it so much harder to see that these are compile-time gimmicks, and users need to be acutely aware of that if they're to use it effectively. Note that I understand (& wholly agree with) the need for runtime introspection. different-things-different-rules-ly y'rs - tim