🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <65076@cup.portal.com> Thomas_E_Morgan@cup.portal.com writes:

   I have been doing some work which involves taking over the
   slot storage for metaclass instances.  The purpose in doing
   so is to experiment with a fully versioned environment, where
   the values of slots, as well as the slots hemselves are 
   versioned.  Behaviors get version too, for that
   matter. 

   I'm quite sure that I can get this to go (things like this 
   worked, allowing for names, in the May 90 PCL), but I am 
   curious to hear what the opionions of skillful MOP'ers are.

   Am I beyond the pale here?  This question has also made me 
   curious about exactly where the limits of the MOP design are, 
   and how those limits might be described.  (Something better
   than: "Whatever you can do, by changing the behaviors of
   the GF's in the AMOP book"

I think this is exactly the sort of extension that a MOP should
allow.  It would be sad if this is impossible using the CLOS MOP.
Perhaps some more detail on why you think this may never work would
help.  I know that at least one of our clients is working on something
similar using the TELOS MOP, and has not yet encountered any
fundamental difficulties.

-- Harley Davis
--

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
nom: Harley Davis			ILOG S.A.
net: davis@ilog.fr			2 Avenue Gallie'ni, BP 85
tel: (33 1) 46 63 66 66			94253 Gentilly Cedex, France