Actually, that looks really good. Much cleaner syntax than what I had. But why did you change TUPLE: to CLASS:? Also, is it possible for mixins to inherit from other mixins, like the sequence example that I had on my blog? I'm really happy about the delegation.
Dan On 8/1/07, Slava Pestov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dan, > > Mixins can now define a protocol -- some of these generics might have > methods on the mixin, others will be assumed to exist: > > MIXIN: sequence nth nth-unsafe set-nth set-nth-unsafe length ... ; > > MIXIN: assoc at* key? ... ; > > CLASS: tag name children attributes ; > > CLASS: name ... ; > > DELEGATE: tag name>> name > > DELEGATE: tag children>> sequence > > DELEGATE: tag attributes>> assoc > > ! This is the same as > > INSTANCE: tag sequence > > M: tag nth children>> nth ; > ... > > Inheritance, mixins, and multiple delegation... not bad for an hour > and a half. > > Slava > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. > Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. > Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. > Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ > _______________________________________________ > Factor-talk mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk > ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Factor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/factor-talk
