Re: Multiple classifications of an object

[John Porter]

Mark J. Reed wrote:
> John Porter wrote:
> > Mark J. Reed wrote:
> > > ... be sure that "Perl stays Perl".
> > Eh, puke.
> I'm sorry?  

"Keep Perl Perl" is a non-argument.  And if you haven't heard me
rail against it yet, you haven't been around very long.
I think someone hits this tripwire at least once a month.  :-)


> I would just be curious about the mechanism
> for method definition.  I suppose you could always leave that alone,
> so methods could only be defined at the class level and would
> be one of the remaining distinctions between instances and classes.

Well, without any kind of data aggregation, as in most other OO
languages, what else is there to inheritance but late binding
of methods?

-- 
John Porter

"It's turtles all the way down!"