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
