On Thu 05 May 2011 22:19, l...@gnu.org (Ludovic Courtès) writes: >> Vtables *are* classes, on a fundamental level. Bare vtables are not as >> nice as <class>, but they do describe instances. SCM_CLASS_OF() is >> SCM_STRUCT_VTABLE(). > > OK, it would be more elegant. > > Can it be achieved without GOOPsifying too much the rest of Guile? > I mean, creating and accessing raw structs should remain as lightweight as > currently, so that syntactic-only records à la SRFI-9 can be > implemented. GOOPS objects are currently heavyweight compared to raw > structs.
Yes, I think it can. Actually the motivation was to remove the call to scm_i_define_class_for_vtable from structs, which will allow proper layering of goops and structs. (You are right to be concerned, I think; GOOPS is pretty neat to have, and appropriate to some domains, but has fundamental problems with modularity.) Cheers, Andy -- http://wingolog.org/
