Re: Common Objects

Mark Waks ([email protected])
Tue, 30 May 95 14:08:57 EDT


Mitra writes:
>I believe that the
>world builder is the one who should control what gets seen, so as an object
>builder I put together a kitchen and say that I'd like this really cool
>teapot, but in its abscence I'm willing to put up with the generic teapot
>that is specified here, I'm typicalyl not going to want to allow just any
>old thing that someone else has called a teapot

Yes, but *I* am. The point here is not to force generics on those who
want specifics -- it's simply to come up with a generics mechanism for
those of us who do *not* care. There's an element of caveat emptor here;
yes, there will be pathological cases where a thingy that's been loaded
just makes no sense in context. I suspect they won't be overly common,
though, and I'm willing to put up with a little occasional chaos in the
name of making things generally run faster. You don't have to...

(And note that the keyword proposal is specifically geared towards a
relatively "analog" scale of specificity -- you can specify your teapot
more carefully than I, and constrain the options much more closely.
That's the beauty of the scheme -- it *very* much allows different
strokes for different folks...)

-- Justin

Random Quote du Jour:

"... revenge is a dish best served with a side order of spagetti."
-- Kent, the man from xanth.