[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Moon's comments on Draft 11
- To: Moon@STONY-BROOK.SCRC.Symbolics.COM
- Subject: Moon's comments on Draft 11
- From: Jon L White <jonl@lucid.COM>
- Date: Thu, 1 Nov 1990 21:07:23 PST
- Cc: mop@arisia.Xerox.COM
- In-reply-to: "David A. Moon's message of Thu, 1 Nov 1990 17:52-0500 <19901101225247.7.MOON@KENNETH-WILLIAMS.SCRC.Symbolics.COM>"
re: My only response to this message is that you do not appear to have read
anything that I said in my message.
The trouble with this kind of public message is that it gives no one
any clue at all as to what you are thinking about.
Recall that I quoted part of your message in my reply, and inferred from
it that one of your suggestions would *not* have STANDARD-ACCESSOR-METHOD
be a subclass of STANDARD-METHOD:
[moon]: ... make STANDARD-ACCESSOR-METHOD a direct subclass of METHOD
instead of a direct subclass of STANDARD-METHOD; . . .
[jonl]: As to whether the method class for accessor methods should NOT be
a subclass of STANDARD-METHOD -- well, those accessor methods, as objects,
. . .
I made no comment on your other suggestion, although contrary to your
surmise, I did read it.
Maybe you'd like to take another shot at a reply or rebuttal now?
-- JonL --