2010/11/9 mike clemow <michaelclemow@gmail.com>

Yes, I like this. Or a new type: Class.

As long as the method of comparison is safe (as safe as the typing system, anyway), it makes tons of sense to do it.

I think it'd be safe; the "==" operator is only overloaded to deal with identical types, I think. That is excepting the automatic and implied casting of ints to floats, I believe.

If we used className() and it returned an array of strings, would we get the entire hierarchy? I mean:

a[0]: Object
a[1]: UGen
a[2]: SinOsc

Yes! I think that makes at least some sense; it doesn't require any new concepts, it's simple and it seems powerful. I also want that for UGen connections. Iterating and -where needed- recursing as a way of dealing with trees is very, very powerful. It might be more of a Lisp-style strategy than a Java/C++ one but as far as I can see it can't do any real harm here and it's not especially inconsistent with anything we have so far.

Of course I'm just making stuff up here, stuff I've had on my mind for quite a while (especially the bit about the UGen Graph) but there may well be huge holes it. By all means open fire on the plan and we'll see what bits keep standing. Let's just blurt out ideas and let Ge do the sorting :Ź)

Kas.