From: Mark Sparshatt <msparshatt@...>
Date: 2004-04-07T05:19:02+09:00
Subject: Re: Object oriented does not mean class oriented

rolo wrote:

>I'm not sure I understand your proposal.
>
>[rolo] my communication problem. Sorry. but let me try..
>
>How is Bean different than a class?  What makes
>
>[rolo] Class is an Object that has definition of few method and variables. The also have something like super class and some rules like all methods of super become their own. They also can refer to super class.
>
>But I may have meta data in extremely different form, say Bean. Beans do not have superclass in the traditional way. The superclass is actually some Object that contains field names for the db mapping. This can be extending into the present bean.  Since Beans are Objects they have one most basic thing i.e. message receiving abilities but are not like class. You cannot define methods for a Bean. 
>
>Bean I am trying to express is just a hypothetical example. I am thinking of a better one. I think Teams in Object Teams are ideal but I have little understanding of it.
>
>
>Could you explain a bit more?
>
>[rolo] Hope this helps..
>
>
>  
>
If I understand correctly the difference between,

Class MyClass
...
end

and

Bean MyBean
...
end

would be that MyClass would be an instance of Class, while MyBean would 
be an instance of Bean. So the keyword would specify the meta-class for 
the class. Is this right? If so then it sounds like the _metaclass_ 
property in Python.

I don't know how much of a change this would require to the interpreter, 
or what it would be used for.

Do you have any pratical examples of programs that would benefit from 
this ability?

--
Mark Sparshatt