Re: GOOPS: calling next-method with different arguments.

2013-04-21 Thread Tobias Brandt
> When changing the _type_ of an argument this will perhaps not have the > desired result. You have to consider the specific situation quite > careful. I'm aware of that. The CL hyperspec comes with the same warning. I would probably only use it for initialize, where the next method is basically

Re: GOOPS: calling next-method with different arguments.

2013-04-21 Thread Daniel Hartwig
On 22 April 2013 01:17, Tobias Brandt wrote: > I just noticed something: next-method *already* supports calling it with > different arguments. It's just not documented. > When changing the _type_ of an argument this will perhaps not have the desired result. You have to consider the specific situ

Re: GOOPS: calling next-method with different arguments.

2013-04-21 Thread Tobias Brandt
I just noticed something: next-method *already* supports calling it with different arguments. It's just not documented. (define-class ()) (define-class ()) (define-method (f (self ) (x )) (format #t "foo: ~a\n" x)) (define-method (f (self ) (x )) (next-method self (1+ x)) ;; change ar

Re: GOOPS: calling next-method with different arguments.

2013-04-21 Thread Tobias Brandt
Hi, thanks for your input. I tried to avoid the whole next-method issue entirely and defined a method for make on bar's metaclass instead. (use-modules (oop goops)) (define-class () (s #:init-keyword #:s)) (define-class ()) (define-class () #:metaclass ) (define-method (make (self ) (i ))

Re: GOOPS: calling next-method with different arguments.

2013-04-19 Thread Panicz Maciej Godek
Hey, I've been trying to make some deeper inquiry. It turns out that the case is not as simple as I thought. I came up with the following function (use-modules (oop goops) (ice-9 match) (srfi srfi-1)) (define (parent-methods method class) (let* ((supers (class-direct-supers class)) (sup

Re: GOOPS: calling next-method with different arguments.

2013-04-19 Thread Panicz Maciej Godek
2013/4/19 Tobias Brandt > I posed the following question regarding constructors in Lisp/CLOS on > stackoverflow: > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16089809/whats-the-equivalent-of-constructors-in-clos > > The accepted answer uses the ability of CLOS to modifiy the arguments > passed to CALL-

GOOPS: calling next-method with different arguments.

2013-04-19 Thread Tobias Brandt
I posed the following question regarding constructors in Lisp/CLOS on stackoverflow: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/16089809/whats-the-equivalent-of-constructors-in-clos The accepted answer uses the ability of CLOS to modifiy the arguments passed to CALL-NEXT-METHOD. I know it's (currently) n