[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Class redefinition and class-changed.
- To: Danny Bobrow <Bobrow.pa@XEROX.COM>
- Subject: Re: Class redefinition and class-changed.
- From: Patrick H Dussud <DUSSUD%Jenner%ti-csl.csnet@RELAY.CS.NET>
- Date: Fri, 24 Jul 87 07:34:54 CDT
- Cc: common-lisp-object-system@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- In-reply-to: Msg of 23 Jul 87 19:41 PDT from Danny Bobrow <Bobrow.email@example.com>
I agree that your arguments imply your conclusion. I think however,
that it would be better to say that "updating of the
instances is done at an implementation-dependent time sometime after the
class is redefined." Since this is really an environment support
feature, I think we should specify that it will not occur before the
first method on an obsolete instance is called.
I see two problems with this approach:
- How would the environment guess that a class-changed method will (or will not)
- Even if you see it as an environment support, we need to specify this support
at the metaclass level since class redefinition will be specified. I don't think
we can afford to leave holes like that in the metaclass protocol.