Re: Services can now have a default value

[Ludovic Courtès]

Christopher Allan Webber <address@hidden> skribis:

> Ludovic Courtès writes:
>
>> Hello,
>>
>> Carlo Zancanaro <address@hidden> skribis:
>>
>>> On Thu, Apr 20 2017, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
>>>> There must be some sort of a mapping between service types and
>>>> configuration types, indeed, but I’m not sure how to achieve it.
>>>>
>>>> One solution would be to have all the <foo-configuration> records
>>>> inherit (in the OO sense) from <service>, or something along these
>>>> lines.
>>>
>>> This was my first thought. I couldn't see how to do OO-style inheritance
>>> with the SRFI-9 API, though. I'm not very experienced with Guile (or
>>> scheme generally), so I might do some more reading about that.
>>
>> SRFI-99 supports inheritance, though there’s currently no SRFI-99 module
>> in Guile proper:
>>
>>   https://srfi.schemers.org/srfi-99/srfi-99.html
>>
>> Oh and there’s also R6RS records, SRFI-35… no shortage of record APIs!
>> :-)
>
> A record interface with inheritance!  Neat.
>
> Though hey, if you're going to add inheritance, we also have GOOPS, and
> with the clone macro I sent to the mailing list a while ago that I
> worked on with Janneke, we even have immutable GOOPS! ;)
> Plus then you get generic methods!

Point taken!  :-)

I genuinely didn’t even think about GOOPS here ;-), but you’re right.

Ludo’.