dynamic classes and duck typing

[Walter Bright]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> I don't think that's any difference at all. Javascript does use a sort 
> of Variant for all of its values.
> 
> So if you want dynamic:
> 
> a) have opDispatch forward the string to dynDispatch as a regular 
> (runtime) value, pack all parameters into Variants (or an array thereof 
> - probably better, or even one Variant that in turn packs an array - 
> feature recently implemented, yum), and return a Variant;
> 
> b) have dynDispatch return a Variant which will be then returned by 
> opDispatch.
> 
> It's not less powerful than discussed. It's more .

Yes, I think you're right that the parameters passed should be a 
Variant[], not variadic.

BTW, folks, please when replying cut down the quoting!