🚀 go-pugleaf

Fernando Mato Mira (matomira@di.epfl.ch) writes:

  The idea is never having to define a new DEFCLASS-like macro, but
  use the MOP instead for your customizations.

In my applications, there many things I could do more straight-
forwardly with the MOP than, say, a DEFINE-FOO-CLASS macro.
Nonetheless, I've been limiting my meta-CLOS programming, mostly
because of concerns about portability.

I know that SOME meta-object protocol is a semi-standard among SOME
vendors.  Is the MOP outlined in "The Art of ..." exactly the one
they've agreed to?  If not, is the agreed-upon MOP delineated
anywhere?  Whatever they've AGREED to, do they actually support all of
it?  Finally, which vendors do and do not support it?

Please post responses to the group, as I think this is a subject of
general interest.

Thanks.

John Burger
john@mitre.org