🚀 go-pugleaf

re: I think you have to establish metaclass compatibility, . . .

Well, that is only one option for a metaobject protocol; it's perfectly
reasonable NOT to have such a requirement.

In fact, Lucid's 4.0 imposes the requirement, but Symbolics' 8.1 defaults
all subclasses of STANDARD-CLASS to be mutually compatible.  I think the
intent of the current "Chapter 3" proposal is to require a positive step
by the metaclass programmer (i.e., the default is not having the enabling
method  on VALIDATE-SUPERCLASS, and the programmer must write it himself
if so wanted), and I would argue for this position.  But the other position
-- Symbolics's 8.1 choice -- isn't ruled out by "Chapters 1 & 2" alone.


-- JonL --