[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Method Objects are not Functions
- To: Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
- Subject: Re: Method Objects are not Functions
- From: Gregor.pa@Xerox.COM
- Date: Tue, 24 May 88 10:43 PDT
- Cc: common-lisp-object-system@SAIL.Stanford.EDU
- Fcc: BD:>Gregor>mail>outgoing-mail-2.text.newest
- In-reply-to: The message of 23 May 88 23:32 PDT from Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
- Line-fold: no
Date: 23 May 88 23:32 PDT
From: Dick Gabriel <RPG@SAIL.Stanford.EDU>
I don't understand the reasoning that would argue that a method
object a priori cannot be a function.
The metaclass of a method object is standard-class. Standard-class does
not support the behavior which allows its metainstances to be
funcallable objects. Only funcallable-standard-class does that.
I suppose that some implementation could extend standard-class to do
that, but I don't see that as a freedom we really need to allow.