From: Hal Fulton <hal9000@...>
Date: 2003-11-20T14:33:14+09:00
Subject: Re: "stereotyping" thread

David A. Black wrote:
> Hi --
> 
> On Thu, 20 Nov 2003, Wesley J Landaker wrote:
> 
> 
>>Why not just use empty modules for all this type-checking? This isn't 
> 
> 
> Because class/module ancestry doesn't tell you about type.  See the
> previous 120 messages or so :-)

Ehh, I swore I'd stay out of this. But here I am.

I think what Wesley is talking about is different. He's proposing (or
not really proposing, since he's only asking "Why don't the people
who want this do that?") -- as I understand it -- creating modules
whose sole purpose is to identify the high-level properties of an
object.

And someone will say, "Yes, but I could mix in that module even if
the object didn't have those properties."

And someone else will say, "Yes, but that would be a BUG."

And the never-ending thread goes on.

"The thread goes ever, ever on,
Down from the post where it began...."

Hal