Espen Vestre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Can you redefine CLOS methods without calling CLOS functions that tell > > the object system what to expect (so it can do things like update the > > MRO cache)? I.e. can you redefine them by poking some random > > dictionary? You can in Python. I don't claim that's a good thing. > > Just as I said: Less managable, but not more dynamic.
I'm not getting through to you. Yes, you could create a Python-like object system in Lisp that's separate from CLOS, but nobody would use it. It wouldn't matter whether you could compile it efficiently or not, since nobody would care. What matters is that you can compile CLOS efficiently. Python's object system is used in every Python program and it has those properties and if you try to remove them, you don't have Python any more. A Python compiler has to deal with that. So compiled Python code is necessarily going to suffer compared with compiled Lisp code. -- http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
