On 9/14/06, Matthew Welland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Is there a formal reason why tinyclos can't have its own namespace for
methods? Or, is it just an implementation limitation?
In STklos I was used to doing the following:
(define-class <foo> ()
((bar :initform '())))
(define-method length ((self <foo>))
(length (slot-ref self 'bar)))
(define a (make <foo>))
(length a) => 0
(define b '(1 2 3))
(length b) => 3
Which, IMHO was very nice. No such luck with Tinyclos.
Yes, Stklos' object-layer is much mor sophisticated than Chicken's.
But I don't think Stklos has actually a different namespace. IIRC length
is a method like everything else (I may be utterly wrong about this).
At some stage the tinyclos implementation should be enhanced.
So much code to write, so little time...
cheers,
felix
--
http://galinha.ucpel.tche.br:8081/blog/blog.ssp
_______________________________________________
Chicken-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/chicken-users
