Re: Advice on ST-Object data-structure setup

[Mikael Djurfeldt]

Then, of course, mapping language onto another complex system is perhaps
seldom a good idea. Still, it is one way to create a new type of object.
And, generic functions on such objects could still provide for a nice
implementation of Smalltalk, even if you can't map the OOP systems onto
eachother.

On Sat, Apr 20, 2024 at 11:49 AM Mikael Djurfeldt <mikael@djurfeldt.com>
wrote:

> Hi Ken,
>
> Have you looked at Guile's OOP system GOOPS?
>
> Chances are that you would get many required mechanisms for free. You get
> classes that can be instantiated. You could possibly implement messages as
> generic functions. The generic messages/generic functions already support
> keyword arguments, etc.
>
> Best regards,
> Mikael
>
> On Tue, Apr 16, 2024 at 11:15 PM <ken.dickey@whidbey.com> wrote:
>
>> Greetings,
>>
>> I am looking at porting a toy Smalltalk-in-Scheme implementation to
>> Guile.
>>
>> [Note https://github.com/KenDickey/Crosstalk ].
>>
>> The idea is for simplicity first, then making into a module and
>> potentially evolving Smalltalk into a supported, compiled ",language" in
>> the Guile way.
>>
>> The first bit of business is to get the mechanics working.  For this I
>> need to have an St-Object which is basically a Vector but which answers
>> #false to vector? and #true to st-object?
>>
>> [Note https://github.com/KenDickey/Crosstalk/blob/master/st-kernel.scm ]
>>
>> I note that one might change the T7 type-tag from 0x0d (vector) to 0x6d
>> (currently unused) with a quick bitwise-or, but would like some advice
>> on the best way to do this or some alternate.  I would prefer to work in
>> Scheme, not C, BTW.
>>
>> Any hints appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks much,
>> -KenD
>>
>>