before and after methods
didier at lrde.epita.fr
Sat May 20 08:08:23 UTC 2017
Steve Haflich <shaflich at gmail.com> wrote:
> As for the original question, I don't see any reason the various
> built-in method combination could not have been defined to support
> :before and :after methods. But the way they are defined is consonant
> with the short form of define-method-combination, which implies that
> the several built-in method combinations would typically be
> implemented using short form d-m-c. So the scope of the original
> question probably should be expanded to include short form d-m-c.
Resistance is futile. You will be jazzimilated.
Lisp, Jazz, Aïkido: http://www.didierverna.info
More information about the pro