Re: Re: class proposal 2

--- Serge Orlov <[email protected]> wrote: > 
> Mark Hahn wrote:
> > Serge Orlov wrote:
> 
> >> Every class should have Type type:
> 
> > If this is true, then things are getting too
> complex and I don't want to add
> > classes.
> 
> > I'm going to continue to search for the holy grail
> of simple classes that
> > work with prototypes.
> 
> That's two pretty contradictory statements. Will you
> not add classes or
> will you search and add? At this point of discussion
> I pretty much
> convinced myself how classes (which act like types)
> should be
> implemented. I will sit and watch if somebody
> suggests something
> better. I'm skeptical today.
> 
>   -- Serge
> 

Hello all, I've been lurking for a bit. However, now
I'm confused. Have we actually *decided* whether to
have classes? Won't classes make it more complex?
Is the only reason for including classes
performance-related? What then would be the advantage
of using prothon instead of python? Isn't one of the
stated goals to have a simpler language than python?

Maybe instead of falling back to the familiarity of
'classes' maybe we should redesign and reimplement
prototypes? Just a thought...

________________________________________________________________________
Yahoo! Messenger - Communicate instantly..."Ping" 
your friends today! Download Messenger Now 
http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com/download/index.html