[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Name Change for Metaobject Protocol?

To: Gregor.pa@Xerox.COM, kempf%hplabsz@hplabs.HP.COM
Subject: Name Change for Metaobject Protocol?
From: Daniel L. Weinreb <DLW@ALDERAAN.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 87 17:18 EDT
Cc: common-lisp-object-system@sail.stanford.edu
In-reply-to: <871013102112.0.GREGOR@SPIFF.isl.parc.xerox.com>
Line-fold: No

The CLOS use of "meta-object" also seems right to me.  I agree that
there would be some degree of confusion if we were presenting CLOS
primarily to an audience steeped in Smalltalk-80, which is what one
experiences at OOPSLA for the most part.  But for the Lisp people, I
don't think the differences between our meta-objects and Smalltalk-80
metaclasses are a big enough problem to try to find some other
terminology.

References:
- Name Change for Metaobject Protocol?
  - From: Gregor.pa@Xerox.COM

Prev by Date: Re: fixing our problems with setf
Next by Date: CLASS-CHANGED and UPDATE-OBSOLETE-INSTANCE
Previous by thread: Re: Name Change for Metaobject Protocol?
Next by thread: Re: Name Change for Metaobject Protocol?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread