Re: setf.scm

[Per Bothner <bothner@cygnus.com>]

> Well, I find the concept of generic functions to fit much better with a
> lisp (or scheme) environment

I too find the concept of generic functions appealing.

> and don't see any advantage to see
> methods as associated with or encapsulated in individual classes.

An alternative would be to have methods associated with modules.
Then question then is:  Can you associate modules with objects?

One possible idea for combining generic functions with the kind
of modularity I am talking about:

When object is created, it carries with it the set of modules
visible at the creating point.  When a generic function is
called, the applicable methods would be union of the methods
belonging to the modules of each argument.

This does sound rather expensive, but I think one could come up
with clever ideas to keep things reasonably fast, especially
for teh single-dispatch case.  The real question
is:  How well would such a system work for the programmer?
I don't know.  I would be very curious to know.

	--Per Bothner
Cygnus Solutions     bothner@cygnus.com     http://www.cygnus.com/~bothner