Re: define-layered-method syntax
Pascal Costanza <pc <at> p-cos.net>
2007-07-19 23:38:55 GMT
On 20 Jul 2007, at 01:12, Attila Lendvai wrote:
>> Then what about :before, :after methods? What syntax they would use?
> the syntax would be almost the same as defmethod, with an exception
> that name may be a list, in which case its second element is the layer
Common Lisp already has a notion of function names as lists, in the
form of '(setf function-name). So that case would have to be covered
I would not like to go that route because I recall reading other
discussions about extending acceptable function names, with some
ideas about other indicators beyond 'setf. I prefer not to create
opportunities for potential clashes here.
Of course, your suggestion would have the advantage that it saves
some space. I have already been hit by this a couple of times, trying
to fit examples of layered methods in papers. ;) In your experience,
how much better is your proposed syntax?
Pascal Costanza, mailto:pc <at> p-cos.net, http://p-cos.net
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Programming Technology Lab
Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussel, Belgium