This is the mail archive of the guile@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the Guile project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: (Meta) Guile and direction (Re: Syntatic sugar and identifier permissivity)



Lalo, this discussion has gotten out of control.

The approaches to object orientation that CLOS and C++ represent have
important and fundamental differences.  It doesn't make sense to pop
in on a project, suggest that a fundamental piece of design must be
reversed for the good of the project, and then get mad if people
disagree.

Yes, CLOS is different.  But Scheme is pretty darn different to begin
with.  Honestly, if I accept your argument that we must give people
what they expect, I don't think the changes would stop at CLOS.

It seems to me that CLOS is much more in the spirit of Scheme / Lisp
than a C++ - style object system.  I think there are arguments on both
sides, but I think CLOS is a comfortably defensible choice.  If you
disagree with us, it doesn't mean that either we or you are off our
rockers.

Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]