This is the mail archive of the guile@sourceware.cygnus.com mailing list for the Guile project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

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

To: Ole Myren Rohne <ole dot rohne at cern dot ch>
Subject: Re: GOOPS: New syntax for `define-method'?
From: Miroslav Silovic <silovic at zesoi dot fer dot hr>
Date: 11 Apr 2000 16:09:45 +0200
Cc: guile at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
References: <E12elh7-0005ab-00@mdj.nada.kth.se> <200004110755.IAA00554@ossau> <7ed7nx7zq7.fsf@zesoi.fer.hr> <ebwem8csz1a.fsf@pcedu1.cern.ch>

Ole Myren Rohne <ole.rohne@cern.ch> writes:

> Initial idea: 
> No way, you cannot use anything but a single symbol for "name"!
> 
> Check before screaming:
> guile> (define ((test x) y) (* x y))
> guile> ((test 3) 4)
> 12

Buh-link?!

I had no idea this worked. And I was really talking about
-application- evaluation.

As in, ((lambda (x) x) 4) -> 4

-- 
How to eff the ineffable?

Follow-Ups:
- Re: GOOPS: New syntax for `define-method'?
  - From: Ole Myren Rohne

References:
- GOOPS: New syntax for `define-method'?
  - From: Mikael Djurfeldt
- Re: GOOPS: New syntax for `define-method'?
  - From: Neil Jerram
- Re: GOOPS: New syntax for `define-method'?
  - From: Miroslav Silovic
- Re: GOOPS: New syntax for `define-method'?
  - From: Ole Myren Rohne

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]