From: Chad Perrin <perrin@...>
Date: 2008-10-16T08:51:33+09:00
Subject: Re: Sample for Metaprogramming

--KsGdsel6WgEHnImy
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 04:53:04AM +0900, Sebastian Hungerecker wrote:
> Chad Perrin wrote:
> > I'm aware of the existence of CLOS, but don't really know anything about
> > its specifics of implementation and use. =A0How does it handle the kind=
 of
> > functionality that, in Ruby, consists of sending messages to objects to
> > invoke their methods?
>=20
> It doesn't, really. CLOS methods are overloadable functions basically, i.=
e.=20
> you can define multiple methods of the same name, but with different argu=
ment=20
> types, and it'll pick the right one to call depending on the type(s) of t=
he=20
> object(s) you pass as arguments. There's no concept of a receiver though.

So, basically, instead of real methods, CLOS just uses . . . what?
Parametric polymorphism?  This isn't meant as a challenge or complaint,
but rather just a question so I'll understand it better:

What about CLOS makes it "object oriented"?


>=20
> > Should we take this off-list?
>=20
> Well, since we're discussing CLOS in the context of comparing it to ruby,=
 it's=20
> still kinda on-topic, so unless someone complains, I see no reason not to=
=20
> continue this discussion here on the list.

Works for me.

--=20
Chad Perrin [ content licensed PDL: http://pdl.apotheon.org ]
Power corrupts.  The command line corrupts absolutely.

--KsGdsel6WgEHnImy
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (FreeBSD)

iEYEARECAAYFAkj2gB4ACgkQ9mn/Pj01uKU4ZwCg40JxBLsrXaNtkDZMrUieecYa
1oYAoJ43D+SePbg2bQFQUttB0v/1vKvx
=XZVk
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--KsGdsel6WgEHnImy--