From: Nathan Smith <nsmith5@...>
Date: 2006-08-25T03:06:46+09:00
Subject: Re: Call functions of superclass

On Fri, 25 Aug 2006, Nathan Smith wrote:

> On Fri, 25 Aug 2006 dblack@wobblini.net wrote:
>
<snip>

> I concede your point -- I was using singleton as the object-specific
> class, while it is the opposite of that. Thanks for the clarification.
> Maybe now my arguments will make more sense!

In any case, my original "want" stands, in that super be treated as an
object, and not just a keyword which facilitates a certain type of method
calling.

Nate