Re: Multiple classifications of an object

[Dan Sugalski]

At 03:52 PM 6/27/2001 -0400, John Porter wrote:
>Dan Sugalski wrote:
> > Should it be the fallback *only* if an object doesn't have its own ISA, or
> > should we walk the class ISA if walking the object ISA fails? I can see it
> > being sensible either way.
>
>Oh. Good question.  I'm not sure how it's done in prototype-OO langs.
>I would think that if instance.ISA is set, then, in effect, I'm
>saying "I am my own class!"  Specifically, it would bizarre (in a
>cool kind of way ;-) for there to be two inheritance trees - one
>defined by my own .ISA list, and one defined by the class into
>which I'm blessed.

Well, it certainly wouldn't be the first bizarre thing that perl did. The 
bigger question is "Is it useful?" It would seem to be, in the cases where 
you just wanted to add on more parent classes, rather than having to copy 
over the default list if you wanted to tack more on.

                                        Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
[EMAIL PROTECTED]                         have teddy bears and even
                                      teddy bears get drunk