[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Chicken-users] Tinyclos - a bit disappointing for an ex-stklos user
From: |
felix winkelmann |
Subject: |
Re: [Chicken-users] Tinyclos - a bit disappointing for an ex-stklos user |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Sep 2006 09:43:24 +0200 |
On 9/14/06, Matthew Welland <address@hidden> 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