[Small-cl-src-discuss] Re: small mop compatability layer
mb at bese.it
Fri Oct 1 16:27:30 UTC 2004
Christophe Rhodes <csr21 at cam.ac.uk> writes:
> marco <mb at bese.it> writes:
>> The mopp package also exports the function
>> SLOT-DEFINITION-DOCUMENTATION which while not strictly part of
>> the MOP really should be and is implementened on most systems.
> It surprises me slightly that you think that
> SLOT-DEFINITION-DOCUMENTATION shouldn't be a generic function.
on openmcl and lispworks it is. on other lisps it's a wrapper around a
generic function, what's to be gained?
> You could be slightly nicer to other implementations by doing
> ... (unless (provide-mopp-symbol sym (or #+openmcl :openmcl
> #+sbcl :sbcl
> #+cmu :cmu
> #+lispworks :lispworks
> (warn ...))
> and either provide a method on :unimplemented or a method on
> Unless there's a reason not to, you should be using the "SB-MOP"
> package here. (If there is a reason, sbcl-devel wants to know about
the symbol metaobject exists in sb-pcl (though it does not name a
class), it doesn't exist in sb-mop. [hence the Cc to sbcl-devel].
Ring the bells that still can ring.
Forget your perfect offering.
There is a crack in everything.
That's how the light gets in.
More information about the Small-cl-src-discuss