From: Mauricio Fernandez <mfp@...>
Date: 2006-02-09T02:08:28+09:00
Subject: Re: Meta-Meta-Programming

On Thu, Feb 09, 2006 at 01:44:46AM +0900, James Edward Gray II wrote:
> On Feb 8, 2006, at 7:48 AM, Erik Veenstra wrote:
> 
> >Did I mention that it is possible to double-wrap a method with
> >two or more monitor-functions?
> 
> How is the term "monitor-functions" you have used in this thread  
> different from the standard "higher-order functions," if you don't  
> mind my asking?
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higher-order_functions

Erik's "monitor-functions" would be a subset of (the more general)
higher-order functions (for a relaxed definition, accounting for the
fact that neither the input nor the output are actually functions, but
the symbols given as input map to methods, and the "output" is the
side-effect of changing a method definition).

The "type-checking monitors" would be noted as

 env(#f=f1)  x  meth-name  x  arg-type-list   ->  env(#f=f2)
 =========                    =============       =========
'world state'                 type-checking info  new environment where 
 where #f is                                      #f checks the args before
 defined as f1                                    doing f1
 (f1 would be the AST)

-- 
Mauricio Fernandez