In the context of the CTS. I could see how the systems wouldn't align well at all. This paper now makes sense to me in the context of a prototyping language. The difference being that types are not modifiable at runtime, only compile time.
I haven't looked much at CTS, but to translate this into the C++ type system. I would leave (Bruno et al) classes out of the resulting object code entirely. They would be used only as a compile time construct to enforce interfaces. Objects, then would correspond to structs and classes fairly naturally. Sealed classes would construct their own SealedClass object which would reference their object and method instances. This would probably require some runtime overhead for reflection and GADT enforcement.
_______________________________________________ bitc-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.coyotos.org/mailman/listinfo/bitc-dev
