Strong disagree. Why need a root object at all?

My prototype object system Gerbil-POO has no notion of "root object",
no need for "system-defined slots". You get the slots you ask for, no
more no less.

My other prototype object system, COOP, has no notion of object
either. Just mixin inheritance of prototypes that you can instantiate
into records with a simple fixed-point operation. OOP without objects,
in two lines of code—plus a few helpers to make it more usable.

—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
“One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws.
Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws.”
        — Martin Luther King, Letters From Birmingham Jail

On Mon, May 19, 2025 at 10:20 PM John Cowan <xxxxxx@ccil.org> wrote:
>
> Looking good! However, I don't see the benefit of having multiple root objects. If by convention *the-root-object* has no slots except the system-defined ones, then any alternative roots can be direct children of the unique root with no loss of function. Removing everything in that section except *the-root-object* would achieve a useful simplification.
>
> On Mon, May 19, 2025, 11:08 AM Daniel Ziltener - dziltener at lyrion.ch (via srfi-discuss list) <xxxxxx@srfi.schemers.org> wrote:
>>
>> I updated the proposal. I added a mirror interface for additional
>> reflection functionality. Please have a look, feedback, advice and
>> additions welcome; unless further time for discussion is needed, this
>> will be handed in on the 26th.
>>
>> The proposal can be found here:
>> https://forgejo.lyrion.ch/zilti/srfi-object-system-proposal/src/branch/master/spec.org
>>