From: Dan Sugalski <dan@...>
Date: 2002-09-12T17:05:10+09:00
Subject: Re: Multimethods (was Re: Larry Wall's comments on Ruby)

At 4:15 PM +0900 9/12/02, Yukihiro Matsumoto wrote:
>Hi,
>
>In message "Re: Multimethods (was Re: Larry Wall's comments on Ruby)"
>     on 02/09/12, Dan Sugalski <dan@sidhe.org> writes:
>
>|There can also be some argument as to whether something that doesn't
>|live in a particular class can be a method in the first place, though
>|from my perspective if you can call it as a method it is a method,
>|even if where it's stored internally might be someplace else. But,
>|then, I'm generally not the right guy to ask about theoretical rigor.
>|:)
>
>I guess CLOS people think a method is a particular implementation of a
>generic function.

Wouldn't surprise me, but the CLOS people scare me rather a lot and I 
don't talk to them enough. When I'm feeling like being "correct" I 
consider them methods in the ultimate base class. Luckily I don't 
feel like that too often, as it's somewhat inefficient in the actual 
implementation.
-- 
                                         Dan

--------------------------------------"it's like this"-------------------
Dan Sugalski                          even samurai
dan@sidhe.org                         have teddy bears and even
                                       teddy bears get drunk