[Types-sig] suggestion: replace class with a generic generator statement

[Vladimir Marangozov]

Edward Welbourne wrote:
> 
> See http://www.chaos.org.uk/~eddy/dev/toy/python.html for links to details.
> These essays are nearing finality - feedback would help me clarify my
> ideas.  For that matter, this list has gone deathly quiet ... hello, is
> there anyone there ?
> 

Hi,

After reading the essays, I have an intuition about the overall idea,
but I'm unclear on what the class/object model looks like. Edward,
could you elaborate on your vision about the relationships between
objects/classes/metaclass(es)/types and which of these entities exist
according to you?

I understand that the generator (function) concentrates on packaging
but this is what the class statement does for objects (although not so
dynamically as you seem to suggest), and this is what metaclasses are
supposed to do for classes if they see the light, etc. This is what
meta^N-objects are supposed to do for meta^(N-1)-objects if you wish ;-)

Creating, registering and discovering object types on the fly is okay,
(if I understand correctly your writing) but I lack a global vision
on your object model...

After all, it could be that I'm completely missing the point, so I'd better
ask for a clarification right now, from an end-user point of view, before
proceeding with comments on your ideas.

Thanks.

PS: I've been reading lately a recent book by Ira Forman, Scott Danforth
    titled "Putting metaclasses to work" (Addison-Wesley 1999)
    (http://cseng.aw.com/bookdetail.qry?ISBN=0-201-43305-2&ptype=0)
    which, besides their object model & MOP, reveals another point of
    view on how property packaging can be done (not necessarily very
    different from what you're proposing, but I'm not sure...)

-- 
       Vladimir MARANGOZOV          | Vladimir.Marangozov@inrialpes.fr
http://sirac.inrialpes.fr/~marangoz | tel:(+33-4)76615277 fax:76615252