class proposals - BFDL challenge

Right now we have four major proposals in the area of fixing str_ call_
and/or adding classes.

1) My str_ call_ proposal which has the major prototype object that holds
the instance methods and any factory methods that are not overidden and an
attribute of that object, the attrProxy_ object that holds any factory
methods that are overriden by instance methods.  This is not really a
dual-namespace model but it has the advantages of one.  This is the only
proposal that allows normal Python-like directed method calling.  This
proposal requires an interpreter hack.

2) Serge and Greg's class proposal that has a full dual namespace with class
methods in the outer class object and instance methods in the inner object.
This proposal makes referring to class methods easy but requires sepcial
syntax for instance methods and directed method calling.

3) Paul's non-class proposal that "fixes" the str_ call_ problem like my
proposal but requires no extra method-holding object for a prototype.  This
proposal fixes the str_ and call_ problems only by adding a flag attribute
to a prototype and changing the Object version of str_ and call_.

4) My class 3.1 proposal is to add a class keyword and work with any of the
proposals above.  It would only add design-by-contract restrictions such as
not allowing the class object to be instantiated, only allow the instance to
inherit from the class, make the class immutable, etc.

I personally am in favor of using whatever solution makes the least change
to the prototypes while allowing an optional class design-by-contract to be
used.  To me this is the combination of 3 and 4.

In order to speed up this process I'm going to provide a BFDL challenge.
I'm going to claim that we do not need dual namespaces for anything more
than fixing call_ and str_.  Therefore number 3 is sufficeint.

If you see a flaw in my logic or know of another need than call_ and str_
then speak up now.  If you know of another dual-namespace need than call_
and str_please provide an example.

If no one can meet this challenge then we will use proposal 3.  Item 4 will
still be up for argument.