Article View: comp.lang.clos
Article #456Re: Beefs about lambda list congruency
From: john
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1991 18:42
Date: Fri, 15 Mar 1991 18:42
18 lines
1198 bytes
1198 bytes
kramer@wotan.ai.toronto.edu ("Bryan M. Kramer") writes:
So in summary, my complaint is that the number of
number of required parameters has to be the same.
The problem seems to be that you are thinking of methods as analogous
to functions. They are not. A method is a PIECE of a function, a
generic function. In particular, it is NOT possible in CLOS to apply
a method object in isolation, via FUNCALL or APPLY.
So, you seem to want the generic function to take different numbers of
required arguments at different times. Huh? If they're different at
different times, then they're not always required. So, you want some
of the required arguments to be optional. But only sometimes.
Is this starting to sound somewhat problematic?
John Burger
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<9103151842.AA03261@clouseau.mitre.org>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unreplyable!garbageShow Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!unreplyable!garbage From: john@LINUS.MITRE.ORG Newsgroups: comp.lang.clos Subject: Re: Beefs about lambda list congruency Message-ID: <9103151842.AA03261@clouseau.mitre.org> Date: 15 Mar 91 18:42:23 GMT Sender: welch@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Distribution: inet Organization: CommonLoops Lines: 18