Congruence of lamda-lists of methods with their generic-function
pc at p-cos.net
Sun Feb 9 17:42:25 UTC 2014
On 9 Feb 2014, at 17:57, Pascal J. Bourguignon <pjb at informatimago.com> wrote:
> If you want to allow any kind of keywords for any call to the generic
> function, you can declare it as:
> (defgeneric foo (a b &key &allow-other-keys))
> (defmethod foo (a b &key c d &allow-other-keys) (or c d 42))
> or alternatively, if you're concerned only with a single call, you can
> call it as:
> (foo unknown-object-1 unknown-object-2 :d 3 :allow-other-keys t)
I recommend to be careful with :allow-other-keys t. I recently used it a bit too indiscriminately, and this created some problems. The reason was that I created a few levels of indirection that looked roughly like this:
(defun foo (a b c &rest args &key k1 k2)
(apply ‘bar … args)
If you call (foo 1 2 3 :k3 :allow-other-keys t), this can be handy, but keep in mind that the additional keyword parameter is passed down also in &rest args, and this may screw up further processing down the lines.
It was possible to resolve this with a more careful definition of the parameter lists, and the code is now much cleaner.
The views expressed in this email are my own, and not those of my employer.
More information about the pro