Hi!
Sorry for the late mail; I have been derelict with mail for the last few
months. Terrible. But I did make a potluck dish! Wanted to mention it
if you haven't seen it.
http://wingolog.org/archives/2014/02/18/compost-a-leaf-function-compiler-for-guile
Enjoy :)
Andy
--
http://wingolog.o
Besides, I think that Scheme + OOP has its own flaws. In most OOP
languages, you have this notation object.property or object->method(),
which also allows for chain calls, i.e. object->getChild()->method(),
or -- if you have nested objects -- to use
object.property.propertys_property.
Somewhat r
On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote:
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Jan Wedekind wrote:
Hi,
I have written a small blog post about object-oriented programming with
GNU Guile and GOOPS [1]. Having used the Ruby programming language for some
time, I am quite spoiled when it comes to
On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Jan Wedekind wrote:
> Hi,
> I have written a small blog post about object-oriented programming with
> GNU Guile and GOOPS [1]. Having used the Ruby programming language for some
> time, I am quite spoiled when it comes to objects ;)
> It took me a while to figur
> I think it's a nice little introduction to GOOPS.
>
> I want to discuss this particular point from the post, because it is
> shared by many other people: "... one thing I don't like about Scheme
> is that there are different function names for each type of arguments.
> E.g. adding numbers is don
