RE: Major change proposal

Paul Prescod wrote:

> I'm having trouble understanding what you mean. When you say 
> a "built-in 
> object" do you mean like None? Or do you really mean built-in 
> object types?

I mean built-in object types.  I may be totally wrong at this early point,
but as an example, he declares a C# class called List with all the built-in
List methods:

    public class List:IMutableSequence,IList,IComparable {
        private int size;
        private object[] data;

        ...<snip>...

        public void append(object item) {
            EnsureSize(size+1);
            data[size] = item;
            size += 1;
        }

        ...<snip>...

So when Python is running, it is actually running on real CLR objects with
CLR methods.  I don't know how he dispatches dynamically to these static
types yet.

For every List instance there is a reflection object that can hold
attributes etc.  So dynamic operations like setAttr() etc. operate on a
combination of the real objects and the reflection objects.

I haven't looked at how his implementation of pure dynamic objects works
yet.  I'm having to learn C# and read his code all at the same time.

I'm already less worried about the prototype versus classes thing though.
Just because he's using the native C# classes doesn't mean he's using the
native inheritance.  The built-ins don't use any inheritance to speak of and
the native inheritance doesn't support mutiple inheritance.  You'll notice
in the sample above he's only inheriting interfaces, not classes.