[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Comments on comments on Chapter 1
Date: Thu, 22 Oct 87 14:15:21 PDT
From: Pavel.pa@Xerox.COM
1-3 sixth paragraph: "ordered set" should be "list" in two places,
to avoid implying that duplicates are eliminated from the "set" of
parameter specializers or the "set" of qualifiers.
1-23 first paragraph under Introduction to Methods: same comment.
I would rather that the word used here was "sequence" instead of "list",
just because "sequence" is a bit less evocative of a particular Lisp
data structure.
Good idea. I like "ordered sequence" here.
Perhaps I'm just missing something, but what's the use of multiple
:default-initargs options?
defclass' philosophy appears to be to allow all options and slot options
to appear multiple times unless repetition has to be forbidden because
it would be meaningless. I think multiple :default-initargs options
just act like they were concatenated.
So, to test my understanding, "(EQL -form-)" is a parameter specializer
name and "(EQL -object-)" is the resulting parameter specializer, where
-object- is the result of evaluating -form-. Is this right?
Right. At Dick's request I mailed him a rewrite of this portion of this
section that I think should clarify everything better than my comment.
Moon says: ....
I agree with this. I was surprised when I saw that LIST was more
specific than SYMBOL.
Thank you.
[name of] Standard Method Combination
Rather than add one more symbol in the LISP package that has no
intrinsic meaning (e.g., no value), I would like to see this named
:STANDARD. The only reason the various other built-in m-c types aren't
named with keywords is to make their association with the Lisp operators
clear.
I don't understand what you mean by "intrinsic meaning". Binding to
a method-combination type is as intrinsic as binding to a value in my book.
However, I have no objection to using a keyword as the name, other than
that we'll have to change the second sentence under Arguments on page 2-29
slightly.