From e92cab865981dcc56ba494005390ff5062dfc7f7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: "Alex A. Naanou" <alex.nanou@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2020 21:32:13 +0300
Subject: [PATCH] updated docs...

Signed-off-by: Alex A. Naanou <alex.nanou@gmail.com>
---
 README.md | 9 ++++++---
 object.js | 1 +
 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
index b988487..ea76779 100755
--- a/README.md
+++ b/README.md
@@ -168,8 +168,11 @@ take care of both the _function constructor_ and `prototype.__call__(..)`
 handling.
 
 **Notes:** 
-- this now is an instance method, in the future this may (or may not) 
-move to being a class method...
+- `.__new__(..)` is an instance method, contrary to _Python_ that served 
+  as an inspiration for this protocol. This is done intentionally as in
+  JavaScript there is no distinction between an instance and a class and
+  defining `.__new__(..)` in the class would both add complexity as well 
+  as restrict the use-cases for the constructor.
 
 
 ## Components
@@ -202,7 +205,7 @@ mixinFlat(<root>, <object>, ...)
 This is like `Object.assign(..)` but copies property objects rather than
 property values.
 
-Make a raw instance
+Make a raw (un-initialized) instance
 ```
 makeRawInstance(<context>, <constructor>, ...)
 	-> <object>
diff --git a/object.js b/object.js
index 734d942..ffc1484 100755
--- a/object.js
+++ b/object.js
@@ -3,6 +3,7 @@
 *
 *
 * XXX should this extend Object???
+* 		...if yes then it would also be logical to move Object.run(..) here
 *
 **********************************************************************/
 ((typeof define)[0]=='u'?function(f){module.exports=f(require)}:define)(