[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: anyone define port types?

From: Marko Rauhamaa
Subject: Re: anyone define port types?
Date: Wed, 30 Mar 2016 20:53:05 +0300
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.5 (gnu/linux)

Panicz Maciej Godek <address@hidden>:

> 2016-03-30 13:18 GMT+02:00 Jan Nieuwenhuizen <address@hidden>:
>> Panicz Maciej Godek writes:
>> > I also used GOOPS, which I regret to this day, and so the
>> > whole framework needs a serious rewrite
>> What is it that you do not like about GOOPS?
> Most specifically, I dislike its middle three letters. The problem
> with OOP is that it requires to know exactly what ones want -- it is
> difficult to change the design of your program after it's been written
> (and it is also difficult to come up with a good design from the
> beginning), and -- since it is based on state mutation - it makes it
> difficult to reason about your program.
> On the practical side, it was a bit counterintuitive that <uvec> and
> <vector> were unrelated, and I think that there were some issues with
> <pair> and <list> types.

I like OOP, only I don't like GOOPS. Its classes and generic functions
seem so idiomatically out of place, unschemish, if you will.

This is how OOP ought to be done:


I have created a tiny Guile module ("simpleton") that generalizes the
principle. In particular,

 * You don't need classes for OOP. You only need objects.

 * Do tie methods to objects. Don't pretend methods are external to

 * Don't expose the internal state of objects. Only interact with the
   object through methods.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]