Re: Metaobject Protocol in MACL 2.0

[Bill St. Clair <bill>]

   To: info-macl@cambridge.apple.com, CommonLoops.pa@xerox.com
   Subject: Metaobject Protocol in MACL 2.0
   Date: Thu, 06 Sep 90 10:27:31 -0400
   From: Josh Lubell <lubell@cs.UMD.EDU>
   
   Will the CLOS that's supposed to be in MACL 2.0 include any of the
   Metaobject Protocol (MOP) functionality?  While I applaud Apple for 
   including CLOS in the new release and for changing Object Lisp objects
   in its implementation to CLOS objects, Apple should realize that a
   CLOS implementation without MOP functionality has limited utility.
   Since the MOP has not yet been finalized, I would be satisfied if
   Apple would support a subset of the MOP and document the functions
   used in their implementation that support additional MOP
   functionality. That way, I will be able to locally implement the MOP
   to support my applications..
   
   I am currently using MACL 1.3.2 with Portable Commonloops (PCL), and I
   am making extensive use of the MOP.  If MACL 2.0 were to include a
   fast CLOS with an adequate subset of the MOP included, then my code
   would compile and run significantly faster.  However, without
   adequate MOP functionality, I would be forced to continue using PCL.
   
   Are there other MACL users who would like to see the MOP as part of
   the next release.  If so, then let's make sure Apple knows we're out
   there!
   
   Josh

In the interest of releasing MACL 2.0 in a timely manner, it will
conform to the specifications in CLtL, Second Edition: no MOP.  We
hope to provide at least a subset of the MOP in a future release.
Exactly what this subset is will depend a lot on what the Lisp
community decides about the definition of the MOP.

Said a little less formally: I wanna write a MOP, but I ain't yet had
the time.

Those who need PCL's MOP can continue to use PCL in MACL 2.0.

Bill