chicken-users
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[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




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]