Re: Progress is Our Most Important Problem -- Method Combination

[Gregor.pa@Xerox.COM]

As for all this fuss about method combination,

 I have to ask, what do you suppose will be the ratio of
define-method-combinations to defmethods in Common Lisp code?

1/1000?
1/10000?
1/100000?

Because actual define-method-combination forms are so rare, but
interaction with method combination is so common, I think the most
important thing about method combination is the abstraction.  People
need to be able to understand how method combination works a lot more
often than they need to be able to type a define-method-combination.  I
think that a lot of progress has been made in improving the abstraction,
and I think thats real good.

I believe that both define-method-combination proposals on the table are
terribly over-engineered.  They have convenience mechanisms and bells
and whistles that are not appropriate for such a rarely used form.
Including two different versions of define-method-combination is an
excellent example of this kind of over-engineering.

Because of these beliefs, I prefer Danny's proposal to Moon's just
because it is simpler.