On Fri, Aug 1, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Pascal J. Bourguignon < p...@informatimago.com> wrote:
> Jean-Claude Beaudoin <jean.claude.beaud...@gmail.com> writes: > > > So my question is: Which one is right? > > I'd note that this is a major problem of how OO libraries or > frameworks are defined. They very rarely specify or give any guarantee > of when or whom will send a given message to a given object. > > This makes indeed difficult to subclass and override methods in a sturdy > way. > > This is probably a reason why OO programmers nowadays tend to distance > themselves from inheritance (using so called "flat" hierarchies), and > like "final" methods a lot, which basically denies OO itself. > > > Which is a real shame, because Gregor et al wrote some excellent rules on how to design protocols well in the face of things like inheritance and method combination. I think this is all in AMOP. > Otherwise, for your question, you didn't mention any metaclass. I'm not > sure about it, but I would expect such methods from AMOP to be used > consistently only when you define your own metaclasses. > > > -- > __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ > "The factory of the future will have only two employees, a man and a > dog. The man will be there to feed the dog. The dog will be there to > keep the man from touching the equipment." -- Carl Bass CEO Autodesk > > _______________________________________________ > pro mailing list > pro@common-lisp.net > http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro >
_______________________________________________ pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro