FEEDBACK WANTED: Type/class unification

[Terry Reedy]

I find it interesting that the hackish hook you first added so one
person could write C extension classes should be a doorway to
unification.  Did you have this in mind when you wrote it?
---

Re the 17 line paragraph condenses as "(Confusion alert: ...  To add
to the confusion,  ...slot!)"

 I would remove the outer () and add label 'Explanation:'.  I would
also remove the two confusion alerts -- since your explanation is
pretty straightforward, given the knowledge assumed and the previous
reminder that 'type' is it own type, I find them more distracting than
helpful.
---

"(The names aren't quite symmetric; tp_free() corresponds to
tp_alloc(),
    which is fine, but tp_dealloc() corresponds to tp_new().  Maybe
    the tp_dealloc slot should be renamed?)"

I first guessed that dealloc corresponded to alloc.  Since it is most
like __del__, how about delete?
---

Terry J. Reedy