Re: GOOPS: New syntax for `define-method'?

[Miroslav Silovic <silovic at zesoi dot fer dot hr>]

Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net> writes:

> I also prefer the proposed new syntax.
> 
> In fact, I have always assumed that you chose the old syntax because
> there was some technical reason why the (define ...) syntax didn't
> work for methods.
> 
> How do these syntaxes work with dotted rest arguments?

I like the new syntax, too, but there is a caveat: in

(define (name arg arg...)),

name is same as the arguments in that it does not have to be a symbol
(i.e. is evaluated and the result of the evaluation is called). Is
define-method symmetric in this sense (i.e. is it possible to use an
expression instead of generic function name?)

-- 
How to eff the ineffable?