This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: Trouble understanding define (!)
- To: mlivshin at bigfoot dot com
- Subject: Re: Trouble understanding define (!)
- From: Neil Jerram <neil at ossau dot uklinux dot net>
- Date: Fri, 4 Feb 2000 00:08:38 GMT
- CC: mdj at mdj dot nada dot kth dot se, guile at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
- References: <200001142054.UAA00622@ossau> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <200001182250.WAA00624@ossau> <email@example.com> <200001221200.MAA00478@ossau> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <email@example.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <200001302033.UAA00458@ossau> <email@example.com>
Michael Livshin writes:
why would you ever want to block your methods from extending an
imported generic? so you can have something like CL's `with-methods'
in a module scope? while this does seem possible, it hardly seems
Just to avoid spurious name conflicts. Suppose you import a module
that includes a generic function called "smith", but "smith" is not
the reason why you are importing the module. Then suppose that
"smith" also happens to be the most appropriate name for a generic
function that you want in your own application code.
one addition: defining a class slot with an
(#:accessor/#:setter/#:getter NAME) argument raises error if
(not (is-a? GF NAME)).