Re: Persisting GOOPS objects

[Andy Wingo]

On Mon 21 Jan 2013 13:48, Andrew Gaylard <address@hidden> writes:

> ;; make a new class, make an instance of it, and show it
> (define-class <ag-complex> (<number>) r i)

I did a ,trace (save-objects a (current-output-port)), and it shows:

     (enumerate-component! #<<ag-complex> 16b9a20> #<<environment> 1d51770>)
     |  (#<procedure 1a6c600 at oop/goops/dispatch.scm:204:4 args> 
#<<ag-complex> 16b9a20>)
     |  (cache-dispatch #<<generic> immediate? (7)> (#<<ag-complex> 16b9a20>))
     |  [...]
     |  (#<procedure 14dbca0 at oop/goops/save.scm:92:0 (o)> #<<ag-complex> 
16b9a20>)
     |  #t

Which means that (immediate? c) ended up dispatching to the procedure on
line 92 of save.scm, which is:

  (define-method (immediate? (o <number>)) #t)

Which returns true because your <ag-complex> is a <number>.

So there seems to be an assumption somewhere that numbers are readable
and writable as-is.  It might suffice to define an (immediate? (o
<ag-complex>)) method.  Dunno, I've never worked with this code
before...  Test cases and documentation are welcome :)

Andy
-- 
http://wingolog.org/