commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steve Downey <>
Subject Re: [clazz] Scope?
Date Sun, 27 Oct 2002 06:11:41 GMT
On Sunday 27 October 2002 01:51 am, Berin Loritsch wrote:
> John Yu wrote:
> > Anyway, back to my question: Do we need to clarify the scope?
> The metaclass framework is a good thing.  I think that should be the
> core focus.

I think part of the problem is that metaclass is an overloaded term. I don't 
think we mean to provide a metaclass framework, in the sense that an instance 
of Metaclass would be a Class. Then we're getting into the areas of MOPs, 
Model Driven Architecture, and other (admittedly interesting) stuff. And it's 
hard to do in Java. 

I think we're talking about class metadata. Class metadata isn't itself a 
metaclass ...

OK, maybe it is. I get lost sometimes between M2 and M3, and whether M3 can be 
reflected in M2 for OO systems. Particularly late on a Saturday night, when a 
sensible person would be doing something other than dealing with abstract 
object theory.


Are instances of the meta stuff we're talking about descriptions of other 
classes, or, are they classes themselves?

Now, around the house to check that I changed the clocks back, and off to bed.

To unsubscribe, e-mail:   <>
For additional commands, e-mail: <>

View raw message