[rucksack-devel] inherited slots

[Cyrus Harmon]

On Nov 28, 2006, at 11:55 PM, Cyrus Harmon wrote:

>
> On Nov 28, 2006, at 11:43 PM, Nikodemus Siivola wrote:
>> Cyrus Harmon <ch-rucksack at bobobeach.com> writes:
>>
>>> I just wanted to follow up any on this. Any further ideas as to
>>> whether or not this is 1) a good idea and 2) possible?
>>
>> I'm not Arthur, but I thought there was a reason why doing that
>> for inherited slots was nasty. Not that I can put my finger on it
>> right now, so call it intuition.
>
> Hmm... okay. The obvious motivation for this is that one could  
> subclass an existing class with a rucksack metaclass and get a  
> persistent version of existing data. I can see how this might give  
> folks the heebie-jeebies, but it would be nice to better understand  
> what's _wrong_ with this approach. As an alternative, perhaps a  
> defclass option for inherited slots that _should_ be persistent  
> would be nice, as opposed to having redefine every slot that should  
> be persistent.

You know, like maybe a :persistent-slots option to the class  
definition. Oh, what's that you say, that's already there? Great,  
I'll try that. Thanks!

Cyrus