[Ecls-list] Re: Problem with descendants of STANDARD-CLASS

[Juan Jose Garcia Ripoll]

On Mon, 2006-02-13 at 18:53 +0000, Daniel Debertin wrote:
> Is ECL's CLOS a derivative of PCL? If not, would replacing it with an
> adaptation of PCL be possible or desirable?

I am not sure that replacing it with PCL would help. ECL=B4s objects are
deeply integrated into the C core, which is good. Working out the
details of PCL is probably just as difficult as implementing what is
left. Or maybe not. In any case I would not _replace_ it but probably
just add it as an option. PCL is far too heavy and assumes that the lisp
has a decent compiler. ECL's implementation does some things (method
combinations) in a probably saner way.

> Everybody else is using it....

Not really. I think commercial implementations have their own CLOS
system, and CLISP does as well.

Regards,

Juanjo

P.S.: Sorry for the delay. I mistyped the address and the message
bounced while I was abroad.