On Wed, 29 Aug 2001 16:26:59 -0500, David L. Nicol wrote:
>Bill J. Programmer publishes a class foo that is guaranteed to correctly
>blarg the frobniz, someone subclasses it and breaks the blarg function,
>that simply will not do!
>
>With a "final" it is no longer possible for the new class to id
Michael G Schwern wrote:
> The idea that a class is either 'perfect' or 'complete' has to be the
> silliest, most arrogant thing I've ever heard!
So, subsequent refinements have to use a "has-a"
instead of an "is-a" relation in re: objects of the "final" class.
Maybe the inclusion of this fe
