Dan Sugalski wrote: > * Objects are bigger since they all need an .ISA property, if we toss the > per-class @ISA I certainly like the idea of instance-level inheritance (since it's the only way to go in prototype-based OO), but I hope we wouldn't sacrifice class-level inheritance for it. We could have both, right? We could let classes be first-class objects, eh? -- John Porter
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Damian Conway
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object John Porter
- ALLCAPS subs, properties, etc (Re: Multiple classif... Nathan Wiger
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Trond Michelsen
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Michael G Schwern
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Damian Conway
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object David L. Nicol
- RE: Multiple classifications of an object David Whipp
- RE: Multiple classifications of an object Dan Sugalski
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Bart Lateur
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object John Porter
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Dan Sugalski
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Mark Koopman
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Dan Sugalski
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object John Porter
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object (the ::: ... David L. Nicol
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Mark J. Reed
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object David L. Nicol
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object John Porter
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Mark J. Reed
- Re: Multiple classifications of an object Dan Sugalski