FEEDBACK WANTED: Type/class unification

[Ken Seehof]

Bengt Richter wrote:
> On Mon, 30 Jul 2001 20:42:45 -0400, Peter Hansen <peter at engcorp.com>
wrote:
>
> >William Tanksley wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mon, 30 Jul 2001 13:12:00 -0700, Sam Penrose wrote:
> >> >Guido van Rossum wrote:
> >>
> >> >> I think 'self' would be confusing.  I'd like to propose 'cls'.
> >>
> >> >How about an English word or phrase in lieu of YATATL (yet another
> >> >terse acronym to learn)?
> >>
> >> Yes, please.  Does anyone have any prior art on this topic?  'self' is
> >> nice because it was in common use before.
> >[...]
> >> OTOH, perhaps we don't want a synonym for 'class'; perhaps we just want
a
> >> plural version of 'self'.  'selves'?  'us'?  'our'?
> >
> >Without necessarily understanding the question or its implications,
> >reading the first posting my subconscious came up with "us", too.
> >On the other hand, we use "self", not "me", so it's not conceptually
> >consistent.
> >
> How about clarg?

Is that a proposed keyword or a Klingon name?  :-)