before and after methods
didier at lrde.epita.fr
Thu May 18 09:05:06 UTC 2017
Pascal Costanza wrote:
> I’m just guessing, but one reason I can think of is that almost all of
> the built-in method combinations (except for standard and progn) are
> applicative. before/after methods don’t have a direct impact on the
> return value of a generic function call, so their primary purpose is
> to allow for specifying side effects, which presumably doesn’t make a
> lot of sense for applicative combinators.
> Does that make any sense?
Hmmm. Nope :-) Not much to me at least. I have several cases where I
would have liked to be able to perform some kinds of sanity checks
before executing a combination such as AND OR etc.
I can still manage to do it in an around method, but it feels wrong.
Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated.
Lisp, Jazz, Aïkido: http://www.didierverna.info
More information about the pro