terminological obscurity

[Fredrik Lundh]

Arthur wrote:
>
> Well for one, before new style classes, it was easier to think of an
> "instance" as in some sense a pseudo data type.  Instances of
> different classes - even with no hierarchical relationship - were more
> conceptually homogenous.

nonsense.  Python has always used duck typing (what's important is what
you can do with x, not what type(x) happens to be).  this hasn't changed a
bit.

(if you don't understand duck typing, you don't really understand Python)

</F>