anomaly

[Mark Rosenblitt-Janssen]

Here's where this exploration came from.  I've (once again) been
contemplating the OO nature.

It's clear to me that there needs to be a distinction between
specialization of an object vs. expansion of an object (a new term I'm
proposing to the OOP lexicon).  The latter *adds* more functionality
(like what everyone does with the Object class), while the former
changes the behavior of some class for more specific behavior that was
not programmed in the original class.

It's a difference between, for example, concrete base types and ABCs.
Python artificially tried to make int inherit from object, just
because it can, but this is wrong.  It`s messed with the Zen-thing.
"Purity has hammered practicality [like the fact that we actually have
to work on concrete types in the CPU] into the ground. " (addition
mine).

Sorry I can't spend more time clarifying.  I hope that there's at
least one person who sees the issue.

Mark



On 5/10/15, Mark Rosenblitt-Janssen <dreamingforward at gmail.com> wrote:
> Here's something that might be wrong in Python (tried on v2.7):
>
>>>> class int(str): pass
>
>>>> int(3)
> '3'
>
> Mark
>