On 29 Jan., 19:22, William Pursell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I > believe "per object mixin" is the correct > term for such an animal. The first several google > hits on that phrase all reference xotcl, so I'm > not sure if that is an xotcl inspired vocabulary > that isn't really standard.
well, it depends, what you mean by "standard" when it comes to mixins. We coined the term to distinguish between per object and per class mixins, where the per objects mixins have much in common with the decorator design pattern (see e.g. http://nm.wu-wien.ac.at/research/publications/xotcl-objpattern.pdf) We have as well a paper showing that the approach based on intersection classes does not scale well, especially when multiple supplemental classes should be mixed in, and some of the behavior should be as well mixed out (see e.g. section 3.3 in http://nm.wu-wien.ac.at/research/publications/xotcl-mixin.pdf) If you are interested in the matter, we have as well a recent paper http://nm.wu-wien.ac.at/research/publications/b613.pdf providing declarative semantics for mixins, and there is many more related papers in the publications section of media.wu-wien.ac.at -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list