This is the mail archive of the
guile@sourceware.cygnus.com
mailing list for the Guile project.
Re: closures for GOOPS privates
Miroslav Silovic <silovic@zesoi.fer.hr> writes:
> paradigm rather disconnected from Scheme/CLOS world. I don't think
> it'd be nice to other Guile developers
The reason why I refer to Meyer's work so often is that he has much more
experience than CLOS/Loops/Flavors people together.
It may not be possible to use feature renaming in scheme so that one
must explicitly reorder the class precedence list to solve a MI
conflict. But it is important to talk about the concepts first and to
identify and point out the weaknesses that other OO systems (like
CLOS) have.
As I said, at first I will simply port goops to the new module system
(the module /has/ one or more classes). The disadvantage of this approach
is that you can't store related classes which offer features with the
same name in a single module.
After that I will re-design my module system so that a module becomes
a class (the module /is/ a class). Although this implementation will
still be based on goops it will have the syntax and semantics described
in my previous messages.
> to create a module system that does something Eiffelish or C++ish
> that is at odds to LISP/Scheme way of doing things.
The new module system is finished (more or less :>). It is based on
environments and designed so that you can either choose to use your
own module system or even no module system at all.
Jost