Re: with-slots usage question

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003, Miles Egan wrote:
> Really revealing my ignorance wrt CLOS here (I guess I should actually
> *read* the Keene book I've had on my shelf for years now),

   It is pretty good. ;)

> but isn't it a problem if you try to define a generic
> function if there's already a regular function by that name?

   Yes it is.  I find myself having to unbind 'defun's to
replace them with generic functions.

> The reason I've been prepending the base-class name to my
> accessor functions is that I've been worried about
> defining functions like name, size, length, etc.

   You are not alone in this.  I have many 'foo-length' [1]
style functions.  If there is a better way, I would be happy
to hear about it.

[1] actually I write 'foo-len'

harley.