[Vladimir Marangozov]
>  ...
>  It's quite unclear to me, even after the 50 types-sig messages
>  that landed in my inbox, what an (optional) Python interface is,
>  and why should I feel happier if the Scarecrow (or another)
>  formula is implemented in some way,

Well, I expect just about everyone feels that way -- except for JimF, who
seems to know exactly what he wants from interfaces and hasn't budged the
width of a mosquito's eyelash since this started.

>  given the actual implementation of Python's classes.  Obviously,
>  there's some need out there that I don't really understand and there
>  are limitations in Python that prevent solving the problem easily.

I expect we'll understand Jim's view much better when he releases his
implementation.  Having something concrete to poke at should be a huge
clarifier regardless.

>  ...
>  An aside: An interesting pointer appeared in c.l.py about a language
>  called Ruby which has some nice properties. IMHO it worths a look at the
>  implementation. (Here's a comment from a file "object.c" that bootstraps
>  the Ruby Universe:
> 
>      /*
>       * Ruby's Class Hierarchy Chart
>  ...

OTOH, from the Ruby reference manual (Class.html):

    To tell the truth, each class have the unnamed class (which
    is the meta-class of the class), the class Class is the class
    of these meta-classes. It is complicated, but it is not
    important for using Ruby.

*That's* sure encouraging <wink> .

wake-me-up-in-two-years-ly y'rs  - tim