Class Objects of Anonymous Types
The question was whether anonymous types should be represented in the system by their own class object or if objects should simply provide the class object of the named super-type. It would be simpler if they didn't get their own class objects.
Resolution:
Anonymous types must have their own class object, because given a named object it is possible to know what it contains, i.e. its type is distinct from its super type. Also when passed an object it must always be possible to know exactly what public members it has for reflection to work properly.
jwalker@cs.oberlin.edu