On Wednesday, February 27, 2002, at 03:21 , M.-A. Lemburg wrote:
The discussion is going astray again: Fredrik proposed an abstract base type, i.e. a type providing only the name and an interface which is defined as convention.
I am all for adding such an abstract base type (and others as well, e.g. for numbers, sequences, money, decimal, etc.) with minimal interfaces, but not for fixing a complex interface on top of these.
Oops, I had missed that bit as well, that adding an abstract base type was the intention.