[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Is a class object a valid method specializer?
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Is a class object a valid method specializer?
- From: Kent M Pitman <KMP@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>
- Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1991 14:28-0500
- Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
- In-reply-to: <9103181924.AA09031@kuwait>
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 1991 14:24 EST
From: Jon L White <email@example.com>
My memory of the situation was that it was brough up on (maybe?) the
"mop" mailing list last fall, when the 11-Jul-90 MOP proposal was being
disucssed. Moon claimed it was probably an oversight, and several of
us agreed with him (I amongst those in agreement). However, at least one
person disagreed (I think Gregor?), but didn't make the disagreement
explicit other than "user interface" considerations.
Btw, without the ability to name a class object here, the entire
defmethod layer is not accessible to programs that deal with anonymous
classes. I regard this as more than `mere user interface' since it
may force some programmers to access an entire new level of substrate
which they might otherwise never have any need to know or use.