[Types-sig] PyDL RFC 0.02

[scott]

On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 11:30:47AM -0800, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Mon, 27 Dec 1999, scott wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, Dec 27, 1999 at 12:54:54PM -0500, Paul Prescod wrote:
> > > scott wrote:
> > > > 
> 
> However: I'm still against adding a whole new namespace. I haven't seen a
> good argument for why it is needed. Can somebody come up with a concise
> rationale?
> 

In my understanding of it, a separate namespace is needed for the
generation of compile-time checking, simply because compile time
checking can't know everything that happens in the run-time namespace.
In other words, the static-type interpreter in the RFC needs it's own
way of dealing with variable names.

This perspective, however, is 100% independent of the idea of a
separate namespace at run time.  I don't see a need for a separate run
time namespace at all, only for a modular, cleanly accessible way of
accessing type information at run time.

scott