add-named-xxx

[Jon L White <edsel!jonl@labrea.Stanford.EDU>]

re: The way that add-named-method -is- different from add-named-class and
    add-named-generic-function (ahem) is that add-named-method doesn't have
    a symbol as a name, instead the conceptual name (something that
    identifies a prior object to be replaced) is composed of the generic
    function, the specializers, and the qualifiers.  That difference is
    inherent, but the other differences in your most recent draft are
    accidental and should be eliminated.  . . . 

I.e., the "name" for a method isn't a symbol but could be a "definition
spec" (or "function spec" if you will).  


Although one might facetiously suggest that  

	(lambda (x y) (list x y)) 

is a "conceptual" name for the function 

	#'(lambda (x y) (list x y)) 

I think this is stretching the point.  On the other hand, having
a name for a method like 

	(documentation (standard-class))		;for primary methods

or

	(documentation (persistent-class) :before)	;for before methods

is a natural expression of "function specs".  [I presume that you
meant "parameter specializer name" when you said "specializers" above].



-- JonL --