[Types-sig] Re: Meta-classes discussion starter

Evan Simpson evan@tokenexchange.com
Mon, 30 Nov 1998 14:20:24 -0600


Re-reading what I just wrote, I think I've found where I went astray.  Given
the chain from meta-class to instance MMC -> MC -> C -> c, I have been
thinking of the intermediate classes MC and C as being implicit in the
definition of MMC, rather than as independently defined classes.

I can see how defining them, and specifiying their meta-classes, would solve
the binding and naming problems.  You could even have multiple meta-classes
just as you have multiple inheritance.  All you need now is a way to spell
static methods.

Thanks for helping me work that out.