[mcclim-devel] McCLIM 2.0 in 2008

[Troels Henriksen]

Robert Goldman <rpgoldman at sift.info> writes:

> I'd suggest that having docstrings in defgenerics is benign, because
> they don't push meaningful code off the screen (assuming one doesn't use
> :method).  That would tend to confine the objections to documentation
> strings to ones that attach to method definitions and function
> definitions.  In that case, one could put a (setf documentation) right
> after the definition in question, so that they wouldn't float away from
> the code, but wouldn't push the lambda list away from the body of the
> definition.  I assume that, the way they are placed, below the slot
> definitions, documentation strings for defclass are benign.
>
> Would that be a reasonable compromise?

I could live with that. Also because the majority of the interesting
docstrings live in defgenerics and defclasses, anyway.

-- 
\  Troels
/\ Henriksen