before and after methods
didier at lrde.epita.fr
Thu May 18 08:42:40 UTC 2017
zbyszek <zbyszek at mimuw.edu.pl> wrote:
> Dnia 2017-05-17, śro o godzinie 15:24 -0400, Sam Steingold pisze:
>> If you are defining the method combination, you have way more freedom
>> and flexibility than mere before and after. Basically, you can do it
> But Didier is asking about BUILT-IN method combinations. Possibly it
> was hard to define reasonable agreed semantics for before an after
> methods in the case of something like AND or APPEND (technical
> troubles aside).
Right. I was merely curious. It's pretty obvious to me why you
wouldn't allow CALL-NEXT-METHOD in non-standard built-in combinations,
but I can't figure out why or how before and after methods could be
problematic, so I was wondering...
Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated.
Lisp, Jazz, Aïkido: http://www.didierverna.info
More information about the pro