no-next-method lexical function

[Patrick H Dussud <DUSSUD@Jenner.csc.ti.com>]

     Gregor said:
     
     This is a good idea.  We should add a generic function called
     NEXT-METHOD-MISSING which receives the generic-function, method and the
     arguments as its arguments.
     
     (defmethod next-method-missing ((gf standard-generic-function)
                                     (m standard-method)
                                     &rest args)
       (error "No next method"))
     
     
     Moon said:
     
     NO-NEXT-METHOD is a more consistent name.  I don't understand what method
     you propose it would receive as an argument; I think it should receive the
     same arguments as NO-APPLICABLE-METHOD.
     
     Gregor said:
     
     I agree that no-next-method is a better name.  The method I propose it
     receive as an argument is the currently executing method.  This gives
     specializations of no-next-method which want to try to determine which
     method to invoke more information to work with.
     
     What do others think? (Heard this line before anywhere?)
     -------

I think the concept of NO-NEXT-METHOD is fine. I don't have any
opinions about the method argument. I'd like to see David's objection
to it.

Patrick.