[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: some questions on your chapter 2 comments
- To: Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
- Subject: Re: some questions on your chapter 2 comments
- From: Danny Bobrow <Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM>
- Date: 19 Jan 88 15:40 PST
- Cc: Common-Lisp-Object-System@SAIL.STANFORD.EDU
- In-reply-to: David A. Moon <Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>'s message of Tue, 19 Jan 88 14:51 EST
- Sender: Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM
I think defgeneric should handle its specially-defined methods
in exactly the same way that defclass handles its.
We decided at our last meeting that each class has a slot in
which it remembers a list of the defclass-defined methods. I'm not
imagining this, am I? I remember that idea winning out over giving
each method a slot that says how it was defined or having
defclass-defined methods be a special subclass.
I don't remember this, but my memory and notes are not to be trusted. Do you
remember any of the arguments for this decision. An argument against this is
that it implies that remove-method, and add-method that overrides must both be
cognizant of (side-effect) this list in this slot.