[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: standard-type-classes

    Date: 23 Jan 87 11:37 PST
    From: Gregor.pa@Xerox.COM

    The distinction I am drawing is that class-of, unlike type-of is
    required to return the most specific class of which its argument is an
    instance.  But, when we specify classes, as when we specify types, we
    mean that the object in question must be an instance of that class or
    some subclass.

I agree.  (My previous message saying class-of is like type-of might have
been taken as disagreement, but it wasn't.)