Re: Generics vs. Message passing: object namespaces

On 2/23/07, Tom Locke <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Does "good" mean better than anything we currently have in a
> production-grade language?
>
> CLOS and Dylan do in fact suffer from type-name-in-the-method-name
> syndrome do they not?

Dylan has module and library support allowing renaming of imports and
exports. So it's definitely possible to have a 'draw' generic that
does one thing, and a generic with the same name in a different module
that does something different, with different number of arguments,
etc.

If you need to have both 'draw' generics you then rename them on
import when defining the module so they are distinct.

The reason a lot of libraries go for the type-name-in-the-method-name
approach is because using this import/export can be a pain if it's a
commonly used name (like 'add', etc). You can end up with a lot of
renames in the module import.

Chris.
-- 
http://www.bluishcoder.co.nz