Re: [pro] Modularity for subclassing in Common Lisp

I think the idea to use packages to specify module protocol (interface, contract) is right. And also I think this is better than to have a separate public/protected/private language feature for classes. What would be the motivation for a separate language feature? What is the difference for

Re: [pro] (values) for for-effect functions

It looks like we do not have a concensus. Thanks to everybody for contributing! -- Dan ___ pro mailing list pro@common-lisp.net http://common-lisp.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pro