: METHOD-COMBINATION arg to ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION

Article View: comp.lang.clos

Article #23

#23

From: Jon L White
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1992 23:11

16 lines
1031 bytes

Should ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION coerce its :METHOD-COMBINATION
argument?  That is, should it be acceptable to pass 'APPEND to
ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION rather than the method-combination 
metaobject?  What do you think?

AMOP suggests that the creation protocol for generic functions
wants objects, not names; but ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION is somewhat
of an interface.


-- JonL --


P.S.  There are probably other lurking name-versus-object questions
      for other AMOP functions.  If you have any other thoughts about
      useful coercions . . .

Technical Details

Message-ID: <9208042311.AA09770@kuwait.lucid>

Path:

arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!olivea!decwrl!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!lucid.com!jonl%kuwait

Show Full Headers

Complete Article Headers

Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!olivea!decwrl!sun-barr!cs.utexas.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!lucid.com!jonl%kuwait
From: jonl%kuwait@lucid.com (Jon L White)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.clos
Subject: : METHOD-COMBINATION arg to ENSURE-GENERIC-FUNCTION
Message-ID: <9208042311.AA09770@kuwait.lucid>
Date: 4 Aug 92 23:11:44 GMT
Sender: daemon@cis.ohio-state.edu
Organization: The Ohio State University Department of Computer and Information Science
Lines: 16