[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Making (CLASS-OF <class>) be EQ to <class>
- To: Moon%STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM@MCC.COM
- Subject: Re: Making (CLASS-OF <class>) be EQ to <class>
- From: Gregor Kiczales <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Thu, 27 Sep 1990 17:43:05 PDT
- Cc: email@example.com, common-lisp-object-system@MCC.COM
- Fake-sender: firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <Moon%STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM@MCC.COM>'s message of Thu, 27 Sep 1990 17:04:00 PDT <19900928000454.7.MOON@KENNETH-WILLIAMS.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Line-fold: NO
- Sender: Gregor Kiczales <email@example.com>
I looked at LISP-SYMBOL-REDEFINITION:MAR89-X3J13 version 8 and expected that
it would prohibit this entirely, but in fact it's silent on the point. However,
in the absence of a metaobject protocol defining what it means, it's clearly
unsupportable for users to define methods on Lisp-supplied generic functions.
Maybe another issue covered this, or maybe it's a hole in the language waiting
to be filled by the metaobject protocol.
At the last X3J13 meeting, I pointed out that the latest version of
LISP-SYMBOL-REDEFINITION was deficient in this respect. I also gave the
relevant text from the latest MOP to Kim Barrett, and he got the revised
version when it came out in July. I suspect that text could be lifted
into the final ANSI draft.