[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Do we have to worry about the names of generic functions?
From: |
Andreas Rottmann |
Subject: |
Re: Do we have to worry about the names of generic functions? |
Date: |
Wed, 12 May 2004 22:34:49 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.1002 (Gnus v5.10.2) Emacs/21.3 (gnu/linux) |
address@hidden (Paul Jarc) writes:
> Andy Wingo <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Consider a generic, `output'. I assert that x.output() in Python does
>> not clobber the namespace.
>
> Agreed, because that name exists only within "x.".
>
>> If output is a bound method, that means it will be invoked as
>> output(x) -- exactly the same as (output x) in guile.
>
> Not exactly - generics sharing the same name don't conflict with each
> other, but they can conflict with non-generics. (AIUI; my
> understanding of GOOPS is rather limited.)
>
Yes, but when the non-generic are procedures, you can "upgrade" them:
(define quit (ensure-generic quit))
Andy
--
Andreas Rottmann | address@hidden | address@hidden | address@hidden
http://yi.org/rotty | GnuPG Key: http://yi.org/rotty/gpg.asc
Fingerprint | DFB4 4EB4 78A4 5EEE 6219 F228 F92F CFC5 01FD 5B62
Make free software, not war!
Re: Do we have to worry about the names of generic functions?, Rob Browning, 2004/05/13