On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 6:44 PM, Chris Angelico <ros...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Mark Janssen <dreamingforw...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> (Note bene: as a comparison, C++ is very UNAMBIGUOUS about >> this fact -- all objects inherit from concrete machine types, which is >> why it remains important, *despite* being one of the worst to do OOP >> in. Its *type model* is probably the most clear of any >> object-oriented language). > > Factually wrong. In C++, it is actually *impossible* to inherit from a > "concrete machine type", by which presumably you mean the classic > types int/char/float etc.
Wow, you guys trip me out, but I guess I've been working in a different universe where I was mapping classes into basic types (using generic programming along with typedef). I'm going to have to re-think all this confusion. But, in any case, if you don't have a way to map your abstract objects into machine types, you're working on magic, not computer science. MarkJ Tacoma, Washington -- https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list