Re: To CLOS or not to CLOS?

Pascal Costanza <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lang.lightweight
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 21 Feb 2007, at 09:23, P T Withington wrote:

> One thing that CLOS got wrong, which was improved in Dylan, is how  
> to choose the most applicable method of a generic function.  The  
> Dylan improvement was the fruit of research started by Ducournau,  
> Habib, et al.  See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C3_linearization  
> for more.

Ah, right. I think, the recent traits approach for multiple  
inheritance [1] simplify things even further.

This can easily be incorporated with a method on compute-class- 
precedence-list - that's a generic function of the CLOS MOP that's  
specifically built in to support changing the linearization of  
superclasses.

Pascal


[1] not the Self traits, but the Smalltalk traits...

-- 
Pascal Costanza, mailto:[email protected], http://p-cos.net
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Programming Technology Lab
Pleinlaan 2, B-1050 Brussel, Belgium
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.